Do you like this book

Do you think they should have done the Magicians Nephew first as a film or not?

  • Total voters
    70
I agree, but I only want them to make another film if they will make it right; that is, in line with the actual story and not a lot of added stuff that is contrary to CSL's vision...
 
Because of the masterful retcon it does to the Narnia-verse adding much more depth,complexity and making very grand implications it's honestly (almost) my favourite Narnia book. It's a very easy,pleasant and fun read that has all major characters that appear develop and play an important part. Maybe I'm partial,because I really like Jadis' character in this book and what Lewis did with her in it. Overall,it's really tied with Voyage of the Dawn Treader for my favourite since the concluding arc of that book was just amazing and touched me on a rather deep level,even though I read it when I wasn't that young. But then again the part in Charn in MN was also very well-written.
 
The Chronicles of Narnia is really great get-sleepy reading for me, so I finally got back into reading it the other night. This time I'm not tackling any specific book or following any specific plan. Likely I will just read any chapter from any book on a given night I wish to unwind.

Sunday night it was The First Joke and Other Matters. Oh, the wonders of laughter! The silly jackdaw made me LOL and the animal perception of Polly and Digory as lettuce seemed only a natural observation by the newly created critters. It was helpful to visualize the cabby and his horse talk out how working in London made them appreciate being in Narnia.

I will probably read again from TMN tonight, and it's rather nice giving myself permission to jump around.
 
I find it interesting how many people who have had credible NDEs say that there is a nexus of realms God created (such as Terra and Narnia) where they come together. A real live honest and truly cross my heart and hope to dance (nicer than die) wood between the worlds. The idea of other realms is particularly intriguing because I can't imagine an "always was" and "always will be" God who lived an infinitely long past (keeps going back never ends, so it's infinite) in the dark, alone, doing nothing. Then suddenly deciding there would be one and only one universe. You'll note I'm not talking about life on other planets in our reality, I'm talking about other realities, and perhaps even other TYPES of reality. Which would make Narnia all the more plausible, though I'm sure there's little to no chance it's called that. And yes I am a reverend deacon who accepts the Bible as the inerrant word of God, but also knows that the hebrew word "bereshit" (Ba-ra-SHEET) refers to how THIS began and does not exclude THAT, or THAT, or even THAT. In short, the Bible denies other so-called truths, but not other realities. I hope that prospect makes you at least go "hmm".
 
EveningStar said:
I find it interesting how many people who have had credible NDEs say that there is a nexus of realms God created (such as Terra and Narnia) where they come together. A real live honest and truly cross my heart and hope to dance (nicer than die) wood between the worlds. The idea of other realms is particularly intriguing because I can't imagine an "always was" and "always will be" God who lived an infinitely long past (keeps going back never ends, so it's infinite) in the dark, alone, doing nothing. Then suddenly deciding there would be one and only one universe. You'll note I'm not talking about life on other planets in our reality, I'm talking about other realities, and perhaps even other TYPES of reality. Which would make Narnia all the more plausible, though I'm sure there's little to no chance it's called that. And yes I am a reverend deacon who accepts the Bible as the inerrant word of God, but also knows that the hebrew word "bereshit" (Ba-ra-SHEET) refers to how THIS began and does not exclude THAT, or THAT, or even THAT. In short, the Bible denies other so-called truths, but not other realities. I hope that prospect makes you at least go "hmm".
Click to expand...
I certainly agree and believe that we are not God's only creation. An artist does not paint just one painting, a musician does not write one song. These are not foundational issues to Christianity so I don't place any weight on these interesting ideas and it does not affect my faith, but I do enjoy thinking of them.

Space is only in more modern times considered cold, black and empty ie a void of nothingness. I love how Lewis describes space in The Cosmic Trilogy "He had thought it barren: he now saw that it was the womb of worlds." and then a little after that "No: Space was the wrong name. Older thinkers had been wiser when they named it simply the heavens."

A book by Lewis himself on my reading list is The Discarded Image. Lewis apparently argues that if you want to truly understand authors like Dante, Chaucer, Spenser, Shakespeare, and Milton you need to understand the mental world they inhabited.

I don't believe the is a Narnia out there, that was created by Lewis, but there could be worlds like it. What holds true is the truth in his writings which makes it plausible in my mind that there could be worlds similar in nature.
 
I like the Magician's Nephew because it hints at a vast tree of separate realities. Sometimes people have this knee-jerk reaction and ask why God would need to make more than one creation. That's when I nod and wink and say, "He didn't need YOUR creation, but aren't you glad He did it anyhow?"
 
Ah, a thoughtful remark indeed. However I don't believe alternate realities form ex nilho without a creator. I suppose the best argument for other realities is the common sense outrage you'd feel if someone asked you why you NEEDED to have a second child if you already had ONE. Or why you NEED a son when you already have a DAUGHTER. Or, for that matter, why you need more than one pair of shoes at a time, or more than one hat. Mankind is often more man than kind, and we make the mistake of seeing all of creation through our human lens, assigning importance to mountains, valleys, deer, and diet coke solely in relation to how they make US feel or what WE can do with them. When that feeling grows much stronger than it ought, we start seeing ourselves and what we do with our world as everything God could possibly care for. And that's dangerous. I once met someone who insisted that there were no other intelligent races in the galaxy PRECISELY BECAUSE they would have fallen with this world and not have Jesus to save them, so they would spend eternity in hell. For a sin committed by human beings on the third planet around some mid-sized sun. That isn't just insulting to the possiblity that there are other intelligent forms of life, it's insulting to God. I aim for a higher standard and pray that mankind will become as kind as it is man.
 
An existentialist (I realize there are more than one flavour) usually believes things simply ARE, and they have value by what they DO.

That brings to mind the old trope going around the internet when a flight attendant giving a safety briefing asked you to put the oxygen mask on yourself first, then on your favorite child....

I see people and things as having value in and of themselves. I wouldn't just invite someone to a party that would invite me in return. I don't categorize people, places, and things in terms of how they serve my needs.

That makes me an essentialist. You are important because you are a child of God, not because of your exam scores.
 
Back
Top