What do you think of Susan's non-presence at the end?

Narnia, I think also has its delights to the young at heart. Those that believe in something spirtitual and magical. Susan was a teenager who was more interested in trivial things at this point. It made things more realistic, I think, that one would dismiss Narnia and consider it "childish" or "foolish."

"The Magician's Nephew" HAS to be read later on in the series. Reading it before "The Lion . . ." ruins everything-- the mystery of Aslan as well as the Professor.

I would make similar arguments for reading Louise Erdrich's "Love Medicine" AFTER "Tracks" and for that matter, watching Star Wars (the earlier chapters) before Star Wars IV-VI, where we see things through Luke's, Leila's, Solo's eyes, and where Luke, especially is getting back in touch with his roots, and thus, we discover in this war, deep family roots. Knowing them ahead of time sort of ruins the storytelling we know and love.

Put the Chronicles in the Order that they are, please.

I agree that leaving Susan out of the final Narnia adventure was the right decision on Lewis' part. Remember how Aslan told Peter and some others that they wouldn't be able to return? That ties in with norman's comment that a certain mentality is needed to return to Narnia which most lose as they grow older. I also think that leaving Narnia at a certain age is good for another reason; the former children must learn to deal with evil in the real world, in its rather different, more subtle forms. They must also learn to recognize, believe in, and fight for/with Aslan's counterpart in the real world - Jesus. Aslan refers to this in The Silver Chair.

And of course there have to be seven of 'em at the end; Susan would make 8.

Why do there have to be seven at the end? I've forgotten that detail.

Because Seven is an important number for Voyager fans.

But seriously folks. I'm not that much into numerology, but seven often symbolizes completion in the book of Revelation and elsewhere.

If 'The Last Battle' were a TV show instead of a book, I'd say the reason Susan wasn't there was because the actress demanded too much money. (g).

I agree with norman regarding the order that these books should be read in! I recently re-read them (when I bought a gorgeous boxed set of hard- covers) and read "Nephew" first. I had never read it, and I was so disappointed in it. It didn't feel like Narnia at all! I still love the others, of course, but "Nephew" definitely needs to be read last!
Or not at all.

I disagree. I read from The Magician's Nephew through to The Last Battle as a child in that order and never had a problem with it. I just realised the LWW was set much later on in Narnia's history and so on.

I personally think that nothing written as a prequel should be read before the books that follow it chronologically, but that's just my opinion. (This can make varying amounts of difference, natch, but in "Star Wars" it's especially true. I wouldn't have been able to make sense of any of Ep 1 if I hadn't seen the others.)

Just started rereading the books & thinking about Susan again. I'm still not convinced that she was someone who would "outgrow" Narnia. She _grew up_ in Narnia. We see her as a queen at the end of _The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe_ and as someone considering marriage in _Horse and His Boy_. Why would she forget that for the sake of being a teenager in our world?

Perhaps Lewis meant Susan's disbelief to be a
mirror of his own adolescent and adult atheism
before he returned to the Christian Faith.
Then again,only C.S.Lewis knows why!

The reunion of all the characters from the
previous books is one of the best scenes,as
it points out what Heaven will be like!

The ending where they all see Aslan as more than
a Lion is a hint of His true identity.
(Of course Alsan's True Identity is hinted at
throughout the series,especially in the Resurrection scene in The Lion,The Witch And
The Wardrobe!)

btw:Interesting that the eldest Pevensie is named
Peter!!!!!
As in St.Peter!!!!!!!!

Also:it's hard to really appreciate the full
impact of Narnia apart from the Christianity that
underlines all of Lewis' post conversion writings.

Nonsense. I don't think it matters one whit if you know what was considered to be Christian symbolism or not. It's still a fantastic story.

Matthew, I think Lewis would agree with you to a large exent,

In one of his non-fiction writings he talks about the power and truth to be found in myth, and the happy discovery that the Christian myth "just happens" to be historically true as well. (It's been a few years since I read it, so I'm paraphrasing, and I don't recall which book this idea is from.)

I didn't say a nonChristian couldn't enjoy the
stories I said that they couldn't appreciate the
full impact of what Lewis was getting at.

It's the same thing with Tolkien who was a
devout Catholic Christian.

Obviously a Christian will get more out of the
stories than a nonChristian,just as someone from
New York City will get more out of Seinfeld's
jokes than a nonNew Yorker.

It all comes down to what your persepctive is.

Scott, again, I don't think so at all. If anything, I think it's better if one doesn't approach the stories looking to squeeze out all the symbolism one can. I find that it's really distracting and ultimately can make you lose sight of the fact that the stories are wonderful in themselves as well. I don't think you can say that someone approaching the Narnia books from a different religious viewpoint will get more out of them than someone else. They could be looking to get two totally different things out of them.

I think you are in trouble of falling ito two
errors:

1)You presume I'm squeezing symbolism into the
books when the symbolism is there for anyone to
see.
Again I must cite Aslan's Death and Resurrection
in The Lion,the Witch And The Wardrobe alongside
Digory's temptation in The Magician's Nephew;
the reference at the end of The Last Battle to
the Children finally seeing Aslan as He is and
no more as a Lion.
The fact that in The Voyage Of The Dawn Treader
Aslan tells Lucy and Edmund that they must come
to know Him by Another Name in Our World.
Also the fact that Aslan appears throughout the
books as a Lion.
Check out especially Rev.5 where Jesus is described as both a Lion and a Lamb.
(Interesting at the end of The Voyage Of The
Dawn Treader the Children find Aslan as a Lamb
preparing a supper of fish for them,this is
clearly a symbolic reference to John 21 where
the Apostles go fishing and find our Lord on the
shore preparing a meal for them when they return
with the catch.

2)The second error you are in danger of falling
into is trying to secularize Lewis' works.They
are Christian fantasy written by a Christian
author and that shouldn't be forgotten.
Yes,as I said before anyone can enjoy them,but
to the Christian they will have more of a meaning
than to a NonChristian,who will only consider them
interesting and fun to read.

btw:I read some time back on the CBN website where
they were doing a documentary on Lewis and his work and the people in charge wanted the producer
to downplay his Christianity,which I think you
should never do.

Lewis' works can never be fully and successfully
separated from his Christianity because the minute
you do that they loose the very thing that made them special in the first place!

Agreed--and before anyone argues, you can apply the same idea to any author! At least, the more you know about an author's perspective, the better you will understand their work. For instance, Ursula K. LeGuin (A Wizard of Earthsea and multiple adult scifi novels) is a Taoist. Once I learned that, some of the images and idea she uses, especially in her Earthsea books, made a lot more sense! (and I'm a Christian, not a Taoist)

You're demolishing an argument I never made. Never once did I say that there *wasn't* symbolism in the books. I said that one doens't have to be a Christian to get it, and I further stated that it doesn't really matter to me whether it's in there or not. To be honest, I get sick and tired of people claiming that religious references somehow make a story better. They don't, they just make a different story. The Narnia books are a good story whether or not you get all the religious stuff that's going on, but I don't think that "getting it" will really add to what you getout of reading them.

You're right about the enjoyment of a book being just fine without religious references, but I still think that being able to "get" the symbolism in a work does enhance one's enjoyment immensely (I am an English major, and so of course, quite mad).

Maybe it should be said different: You don't have to *be* a Christian, you need to have a *Christian background or experience* - which is sth. very different. Many people in Germany, (as in many european countries) aren't believers or religious in any way, but they know the basic stuff about christianity. After the east bloc crumbled, we noticed how much christianity, its stories, symbols and so on has influenced our culture, because the east germans who grew up during the 40 years of the east german republic didn't know anyhting about it! They don't know why we celebrate christmas or other most basic stuff. This means that they have trouble studying things like art, when most old pictures show christian scenes, or literatures, where allusions are made permanently, and so on. They have a hell of a time trying to catch up to understand even the most basic references ("Who is the man from Galilee?" for example)

Jessica: Actually, Susan is definately the most likely to have forgotten Narnia. Consider these two scenes from Prince Caspian. When they're voting on whether or not to follow where Lucy said Aslan went, Edmund willing to do it and Peter is somewhat indecisive, but Susan outright refuses. Also when they follow Aslan later, Susan is the last of the four to see Aslan. There's probably some other stuff that supports this, but what I've said is the most solid evidence.

Having come at it from both perspectives, I would say that reading the books from a Christian perspective/with a knowledge of Christian beliefs does indeed make the stories more enjoyable.(This is not to say that they weren't enjoyable before hand- I don't think anyone can thruthfully say that- just that they are MORE enjoyable from a Christian perspective.)

I think this is for the same reason that I am a "Read the Magician's Nephew as book 6 not book 1" advocate:
The subtleties, the nuances, the themes building on what was previously established grant a great deal more respect for the authors talents and a great deal more of enjoyment from the books. The process becomes one of discovery as the reader gradually understands the interlocking and intertwining concepts and the true depth of the story parallels and the world that has been created in general.

To read 'Magician's Nephew' first, or approach the Narnia series fom a secular perspective does not rob them of their enjoyability, it simpy excludes an extra layer of discovery, understanding, and enjoyment that comprehending C.S. Lewis' universe in it's full depth creates.


(P.S. I.M.H.O.)

(Continued from the board for the 2005 movie of tLtW&tW)

(Discussing Susan's apostasy) And of course one of the children had to leave so there would be the magical number of seven kings and queens for the last battle. Constanze

And it couldn't be Eustace or Edmund, or Lucy or Jill, for obvious reasons, and of the other four, either Polly or Susan are more expendable than Digory and Peter.

Yes... and Susan, out of the two, was probably chosen (from a litterary standpoint) because her absence would have a far greater emotional impact, being a familliar and sympathetic character far better known and longer running than Polly.

(On a somewhat tangential note, I think that there are a number of good, unwritten Narnia stories that could have been made, had Lewis chose to create them; among the ones I'd like to see:

Digory and Polly's story- what have they been doing all these years?

Peter and Susan's story- How do their lives diverge so in the years following Prince Caspian? What are their experiences, leading one astray and strengthening the faith of the other? What worldly pressures assualt those who have ruled in another world, which seems like merely a dream, now? How do they, and later Lucy and Edmund, react, learning of the adventures others have had in Narnia without them? And of course, the best scene of all: How do they react when Digory finaly drops the bomb on them? "Well, now... you may THINK you were the first humans in Narnia, and you may THINK you were the first ones to meet the White Witch... but have I got a story to tell you!"

Susan's Story- as she would have had no reason to be on the train, we can assume she survived- what would happen to her after losing her entire family? Her faith?

Frank and Helen- What is it like, being Adam and Eve in a world where nearly every species has it's own Adam and Eve? What is it like, building civilization from the ground up? Laying the first foundations, establishing the first traditions; trying to be wise and benevolent rulers in a land that you, of all present, probably know the least about?

Cor and Aravis, as well as Ram the great- What else happened during their reign? Why was Ram so well known and loved?

Alas, these tales are not to be, but it makes you wonder...)

If you are intested in Susan's story, try Neil Gaiman's excellent - but very dark, so be warned - short story "The Problem of Susan". I think it might even be available on the net somewhere.