Does Susan go to the "New Narnia"?/Whatever happened to Susan?

[inkspot]

I think Malacandra's options for Susan are probably about right. As she was no scholar, she probably married -- as she was a great beauty, she might have married very well. And I know some old ladies who were about her age during WW II, and they are grannies now, or great-grands. I like to think ol' Susan sees the movie with her great-grandchildren, realizes it was made about her and her siblings, remembers what it was like to be with Aslan, and finds her way back to his country!

 

[SailorSaturn13]

I think Malacandra's options for Susan are probably about right. As she was no scholar, she probably married -- as she was a great beauty, she might have married very well. And I know some old ladies who were about her age during WW II, and they are grannies now, or great-grands. I like to think ol' Susan sees the movie with her great-grandchildren, realizes it was made about her and her siblings, remembers what it was like to be with Aslan, and finds her way back to his country!

I think this vision is fairly true. However, I don't think Susan will need to "redeem" herself. Gentleness is, after all, "the most important and precious gift". What Susan lacks in belief in God she more than compensates by her belief in humans. She can become a wonderful wife and loving mother. "Nylons and Lipstick" about which Lucy complains are a helpless but first step towards this - a phase through which a girl must pass in order to grow up. I can imagine her encouraging her childer to be solidary with others and help them. And to uphold the fairy-tales in your heart but not be stuck in them, using them in real life instead. Susan, like Cinderella, is undergoing a transition from one phase of her life to another. Lewis didn't approve of that. But WE should. She is, like Philip Pullman said, "a Cinderella in a story where the Ugly Sisters win." But I am sure she will find her prince, as did Wendy from "Peter Pan", who is also "Not a friend of Neverland anymore". Susan can have a fulfilled and long life HERE, on Earth - and come in Heaven after that.

Note: before, Lewis appreciated that. In PC, Aslan says that they must "go closer to their world" - and this Susan does. And that she no longer believes in Narnia isn't a catastrophe - "If someone says Tash and does good, he belongs to me" - said Aslan.

BTW, I think Rowling took her as a model for Lily Evans...

 

[Soli_Deo_Gloria]

____SS13 I part agree and disagree with you. I agree that Susan need not immediately return to Narnia, perhaps not even return to believing in Narnia, but she does have some growing up to do. When I read TLB (my sencond favorite by the way) I took it "nylons and lipstick" to mean she had begun to value the outward apperance more than inward beauty. As a guy I cannot speak to how girls mature, but I can speak how a guy views that process. It seems to me that some girls hit a stage where appearance is paramount. How they treat others and respect for themselves falls to the wayside and will be sacrificed if they can look appealling. Personally nothing is more childish. To paraphrase my father, maturity is measured by how much you think of others before yourself.
____I would also take issue with your statemen

" What Susan lacks in belief in God she more than compensates by her belief in humans."

No amount of belief in finite, flawed humans and make up for trust in the infinite, perfect, loving God. The best way for her to become a loving wife and mother is to follow the example of Aslan, who thought of Edmund before Himself.
____On your note, in PC I took Aslan to mean the children, who according to the above definition were much less children than some adults I know, must grow closer to Him in our world, not grow closer to our world.
____So I agree that Susan can live a long fulfilled life here, but I disagree that she can continue to ignore Aslan. To have a good life here she must return to the laws Aslan lived out and taught, even though she call Aslan by His name here and call Narnia a fairy tale

Note: If one truely knew the nature of Tash they would have a hard time doing good. If they did say Tash and do good, as soon as they learned the truth of Aslan they would switch sides. Susan knows the truth of Aslan and can no longer call on Tash, this is related to some of Lewis other theological beliefs and that is another thread around here somewhere.

 

[SailorSaturn13]

No amount of belief in finite, flawed humans can make up for trust in the infinite, perfect, loving God.

The very idea of christianity is to love people, not God.

And yet many horrible thing were done by people believing in a God while mistrusting other people to be good. Inquisition, someone?

wehave very many valiant people, (often fighting on different sides), and many who are just (but their justice differs...) but few people bring the needed understanding and kindness towards others.

I took it "nylons and lipstick" to mean she had begun to value the outward apperance more than inward beauty. It seems to me that some girls hit a stage where appearance is paramount.
How they treat others and respect for themselves falls to the wayside and will be sacrificed if they can look appealling.

This is a not that good, but a nesessary stage. The point is that the OPINION of others becomes important at that point, but the UNDERSTANDING that one should build this opinion by inward beauty (and one's doings) rather than by appearance only comes later.

And yet, we just DON'T know what really happens in Susan. Given her charackteristics before, it's far more likely, that she already IS more (and her parties have some sence), but Lewis (and so his "positive" heroes) just see "nylons and lipstick"
Note: unlike Tolkien, who had three sons and a daughter, Clive Staples Lewis knew very little about children.

 

[PrinceOfTheWest]

The very idea of christianity is to love people, not God.

Where did you get the curious idea that these two are in opposition? The central laws of Christianity, as delivered by its Founder, are, "You shall love the Lord your God will all your heart and all your soul and all your mind and all your strength", and "You shall love your neighbor as yourself."

And yet many horrible thing were done by people believing in a God while mistrusting other people to be good. Inquisition, someone?

Why, when people say this, do they conveniently omit all the positive things that have been done by Christians? Like eliminating slavery, promoting justice, valuing women and children, supporting families, and the like? Sure, people fail - but if they are held to a high standard, they get up and keep striving to meet the standard. If you're as concerned about justice as you seem to wish you are, then tell the whole story.

 

[Malacandra]

I think this vision is fairly true. However, I don't think Susan will need to "redeem" herself. Gentleness is, after all, "the most important and precious gift". What Susan lacks in belief in God she more than compensates by her belief in humans. She can become a wonderful wife and loving mother. "Nylons and Lipstick" about which Lucy complains are a helpless but first step towards this - a phase through which a girl must pass in order to grow up.

Except that as Lucy, Jill and Polly all agree from their different perspectives, the trouble with Susan is that she is not passing through that phase at all – rather that she made haste to get to that stage in life as quickly as she could and remain there as long as humanly possible. I might like icing (actually I hate the stuff), but, while there would be nothing wrong with me in enjoying icing in its proper place, it would be very foolish of me to consider icing as the only food worth eating, and neglect all other food in order to put only icing on my plate. I would become very ill and die an early death if I did.

I can imagine her encouraging her childer to be solidary with others and help them. And to uphold the fairy-tales in your heart but not be stuck in them, using them in real life instead.

But she was not upholding the fairytales in her heart – she denied that they had ever been anything but a children’s game!

Susan, like Cinderella, is undergoing a transition from one phase of her life to another.

No. See above. A “transition” implies that she will emerge from it, and on the information given, that’s the one thing Susan is determined not to do.

Lewis didn't approve of that.

Not proven by any argument you have brought. At least, not if she were truly undergoing a transition. That he didn’t approve of the deliberately getting stuck, I’ll not dispute.

But WE should. She is, like Philip Pullman said, "a Cinderella in a story where the Ugly Sisters win." But I am sure she will find her prince, as did Wendy from "Peter Pan", who is also "Not a friend of Neverland anymore". Susan can have a fulfilled and long life HERE, on Earth - and come in Heaven after that.

Oh, Philip Pullman. A piece by piece dissection of Pullman’s wrong-headed views is beyond the scope of this post. On the little I know of the man, it is not to be wondered at that the one character in the books he should most like would be the one least true to Narnia and Aslan, and by extension Christianity and Jesus. As to Neverland, the case is somewhat different (and whether Wendy can be described as “not a friend of Neverland anymore” is open to debate, too). No-one is suggesting that Narnia is, or should be, a place where you perpetually deny adulthood and adult responsibilities. Indeed, the stories pretty much without exception thrust adult responsibility onto very young shoulders. Returning from Neverland is almost the opposite of returning from Narnia.

But hey – you think Susan can do as she pleases with her life and ignore Aslan all she likes, and still end up with the same reward as her brothers, sister, cousin and friends who all kept the faith? And this in some way strikes you as fairer than the alternative? Cinderella? A very favoured Cinderella who was privileged to meet the handsome prince very early in the story, who never went through anything like the privations of the real Cinderella.

Note: before, Lewis appreciated that. In PC, Aslan says that they must "go closer to their world" - and this Susan does. And that she no longer believes in Narnia isn't a catastrophe - "If someone says Tash and does good, he belongs to me" - said Aslan.

This is dangerous nonsense. For someone who knew only of Tash – as did Emeth – to do good in the name of Tash in the belief that he was high and holy, this represents the closest approach to Aslan that this person can make. For someone who knew Aslan at first hand to deny him and, so far from doing good, to concern herself solely with frippery and frivolity, is an utter tragedy.

 

[SailorSaturn13]

Just an info. My thoughts follow later...

(in http://dnausers.d-n-a.net/cslewis/news18.html)
WHAT HAPPENED TO SUSAN?

Michel Faber has written a new Narnia story, entitled 'BRAVE AGAIN' explaining what happened to

Susan (see September 'C S Lewis News'). Positive comments from Gracia Fay Ellwood, Marilylle

Soveran, Keith Wilkerson, Rodney Loewen, Kirsten Edwards and Mary Stolzenbach. Shelly Pitman

complains 'It's not C. S. Lewis' and Angela Johnson is worried about the time sequence.

Kathryn Lindskoog comments-'I have in my computer a good little book about how Susan got back to

Narnia. Here is what happened. In 1980 a cloistered Carmelite nun in Flemington, New Jersey,

wrote an eighth chronicle of Narnia, telling what happened to Susan, and called it THE CENTAUR'S

CAVERN. (At least twice, C.S. Lewis encouraged readers to invent new tales of Narnia.) I found

her a Protestant publisher in Canada who wanted to bring it out. The altruistic plan was to make

it extremely clear that this was not by C. S. Lewis, and to donate all profits to the work of

Mother Teresa. I got Sheldon Vanauken to read the manuscript, and he offered to write a blurb.

Everyone involved felt sure that Lewis would have approved. But to her dismay, C. S. Lewis Pte.

turned her down flat. We were all surprised and deeply disappointed.'

David Lenander adds-'A gentleman (I think from New York) contacted me last year. He's written a

new Chronicle about Susan, for which he cannot get permission to publish.'

 

[PrinceOfTheWest]

Superb story!

For a wonderful story interpreting this question, take a look at this post over in the Professor's Notebook forum. We've had a couple of members take a stab at interpreting this, including the irrepressible Magister Chakal, but this new story is, in my opinion, a masterpiece.

 

[SailorSaturn13]

If so, I suggest you read "The problem of Susan" (of Neil Gaimann), too.

 

[Malacandra]

If so, I suggest you read "The problem of Susan" (of Neil Gaimann), too.

Why?

In all seriousness, I've not yet read it (though I suppose I might; my stomach is pretty strong as well as being well-padded), but what's good about it? All I've been able to pick up from looking around is that it features an elderly Susan who has either miraculously mutated from the not-very-good-at-schoolwork girl mentioned in Dawn Treader, and vain silly creature in Last Battle, into a professor, or who was crassly slandered by the author in the first place and was really professor material all along. Oh, and the sex scene featuring Aslan and the White Witch. And it all took a while to get published because it had to be given enough plausible deniability that the Lewis estate couldn't ream Gaiman a new one. Meh. Why give it the attention?

 

[LadyEm]

Lewis, Critics, Susan and his Supposed Prejudices

This could be a repetitive thread, because I remember seeing many posts along this strain - though perhaps they were discussions within topics that had gone off topic.
That said I apologize for any repeats.

But It seems to me as though there are two camps of Lewis Philosophers: critics and friends.
The Critics are full of bad things to say about Lewis while friends seem to reconcile all the facts in a far nicer way.

That said, I was just having a discussion with a friend, who was reading a book called "The Magical Worlds of arnia: A Treasury of Myths, Legends, and Fascinating Facts."

It goes into trying to explain why Susan was kept out of Narnia and was saying, as part not whole of the explanation - that part of the reason was that Susan was being punished for her sex, sexuality and being grown up.

I have heard this theory batted about online, and it has never sat right with me. The correct reason in my understanding with all that I have understood, read and interpreted is that Susan had forgotten about Narnia and her heart had strayed from it and had become occupied with other things. It is not that nylons and lipsticks and loved were bad things - but that they had replaced and eclipsed narnia and Aslan in her heart. I am quite sure that Lucy wore lipstick and Nylons, but it seemed that they became Susan's love.

It also goes on to say that Lewis was quite a racist and a bigot against every type of group, accepting what other people had said and never questioning what others supposed - against jews, muslims, and other religions. It also mentions that he was very bigoted against catholics - which does not sit well with me, as Lewis and Tolkein were such great friends. Regardless of their differences, it seems as though he respected Tolkein and Catholics in general very well, even though he himself could never become a Catholic himself (he had differences that were irreconcilable).

It is not as though Lewis did not have his faults - even he is the first to admit how black and tarnished his soul is. And it isn't as though he didn't have issues - we all have issues. He also is quoted as saying that Lewis himself felt the most connected to Susan out of all the Pevensies.

I have noticed that despite the research that this person apparently did, when quoting the facts it seems that he put a spin of his own interpretation on the quotes available.

I am curious to know the comments from a lot of you on these subjects. A lot of you are very knowledgeable and I would appreciate the discussion.

 

[SailorSaturn13]

Why?

In all seriousness, I've not yet read it (though I suppose I might; my stomach is pretty strong as well as being well-padded), but what's good about it? All I've been able to pick up from looking around is that it features an elderly Susan who has either miraculously mutated from the not-very-good-at-schoolwork girl mentioned in Dawn Treader, and vain silly creature in Last Battle, into a professor, or who was crassly slandered by the author in the first place and was really professor material all along. Oh, and the sex scene featuring Aslan and the White Witch. And it all took a while to get published because it had to be given enough plausible deniability that the Lewis estate couldn't ream Gaiman a new one. Meh. Why give it the attention?

Because this introduces much more detailed view in what happened after LB. And is also more normal. The point is, Susan emancipated and had a good and fruitful life HERE, on Earth. She DID grew up after all. "Nylons and lipstick" passed, like they mostly do, and out came a wonderful woman. She wasn't broken by the death of the others, nor did she tried to prove something - she just lived , and lived full. As for Professorhood, it does really have little to do with school notes, but rather with being oscessed with the subject, and after a story had cost the lives of 3 her siblings, Susan could surely become obscessed with stories. As for Lion-witch sex, it isn't Susan's dream - it is Greta's, and has to do with how unfair God was towards Susan.

 

[~Grateful * Surrender~]

Ok I must really be missing something what book are you all talking about? Lion having sex of that is just...what is this?

 

[~Grateful * Surrender~]

As to the gender issue it was not because she was a girl but because from the start (I do not speak of the movie but of the books) Susan was always the logical one and she always had to have a solid explanation fro everything. She was the mother of the children when they went to the country in LWW and she was always considered one of the grownups in England among her parents. She was put in as very pretty and everyone adored her if you do remember in the Voyage of the Dawntredder, Susan was favored to go to America with her parents.

No Lewis was no sexist because if he was why would he have had a girl so favored by so many in his books. And looking at his life he went through so much for the woman that he married it is a wonder that anyone could even be possessed with that inclination to say so.

Back to Susan, she let her vanity, pride and favoritism get in the way of her love for Narnia. She allowed herself to be caught up in the things of the world and soon Narnia faded away behind the scenes of worldly beauty and wonder. Susan let the logic of the world tell her that Narnia was completely impossible and ridicules. However the other woman that went back, not young girl such as Lucy and Jill, was Mrs. Polly. She had believed in Narnia till the end and went back with the rest of them. Lewis simply used Susan as an example of those Christians who let the cares of this world lead them away from the concept of Heaven and in all reality God.

The Chronicles were all filled with allegories; it didn’t stop with LWW it went on to the last. Plus, one more comment on the sexist issue, if Lewis was a sexist, why would he have made Lucy the beloved of Aslan? Why would he have had a girl be the most faith filled and trust in Aslan even when the rest doubted and wanted to go the other way? Why would he have put a girl in charge of signs that would be vital to Narnia?

If Lewis is to be called a sexist, that conclusion can in no way be extracted from the Chronicles.
About the racist tumult I really can’t say. I do not know Lewis and his works quite well enough to raise an argument satisfactory to put that debate to rest. I personally do not think that Lewis was in the mind of segregation of any religion. This statement I base on the Chronicles, something that was said in the Last Battle.

I cannot quote it 100% but the feel of it was when Aslan was talking to Culorman Soldier who had come into the new Narnia through the stable door and the soldier said something about fallowing Tash and Aslan said, “ you sought in earnest the truth. You worshiped Tash but knew that he was not the true one. So I consider every good deed done by you in the name of Tash a deed done for me for you sought the truth.” This really explains a lot in a nutshell. I mean think about it, because of Lewis’s allegorical style almost everything can be traced back to our walk on earth. I believe that he believed (not that I totally agree) that anyone who truly hungered after truth could and would find it in God, and the Lord Jesus, even if they never really found namely Jesus but believed in the one true God and his divine truth that that person was saved.

I have done my best at thoroughly defending my side of the Lewis fight. I love the works of Lewis and I admire him as a writer and hope to be, one day, a smidgen of what he was.

 

[devils_advocate_for_evil]

Lewis

I must say I don't know anything about Lewis as a person, but as a writer I believe him to be lacking. His plot is fantastic which allowed for such a great movie, but I picked up the book just the other day and almost fell asleep! His little nuances, like the wand for the witch, give the book the wrong feel. The way he describes, she carries with her a faerie wand, which is not the image he needs. Also, his dialogue is repetitive and lacking in flavor. I can understand that the time period is different, and thus the dialogue was as well, but it would still not be that stilted and formal and repetitive between siblings!! Especially the White Witch's sudden moodswings. They make her seem as pyscho! I was not impressed....

 

[~Grateful * Surrender~]

I hate to say this because I know that you really like Jadas but she was sort of psycho if you think about it. She was a dictator and all the dictators that I have ever heard of are a little bit on the far edge. She was filled with such hate for everything really that psychotic behavior is almost expected. If she wasn’t that way I would have to wonder.
A for hi writing style, I honestly think as Lewis put it, “What are they teaching children in schools these days.” The reason so many think that Lewis is a boring, dry, and repetitive writer is because we as a generation have been dumbed down to think that the paperbacks we buy at wal*mart are so festinating and good literature. We have forsaken the classics! The Chronicles are classics and they were not set as such for no reason. I must confess I am also a great fan of Jane Austin, and Victor Hugo for they, as was Lewis, were great writers. Yes in our society their work may seem boring and dull and even repetitive but that is only because we are so focused on fast paced action that we overlook the art and talent of these authors.
Personally I could not put the books down. I read them in less than a week and that is definitely a record for me. I grew up loving Lewis and his work and now am fixing on reading them all again so that I can grasp it even better. I am reading Mere Christianity at the moment and I think that Lewis is viewed so distastefully is because he demands, by his writing, a higher level of concentration, attentiveness, and really he requires his readers to actually think about what he is writing instead of laying it all out. His writing is not so trivial that you come away thinking, “oh that was a nice book,” but more what did he really mean by…or what significance is he trying to relate to me by this. I do not mean to pummel your personal beliefs but mine are firm and set and I have a habit of speaking my mind.

 

[devils_advocate_for_evil]

You'd be surprised...

I have a feeling you are surprised when I say that I love Mark Twain, Jane Austin, Charlotte Bronte, Emily Bronte, and such classic writers. I loved "A Tale of Two Cities" as well as "Pride and Prejudice!" I just found that Lewis' books were lacking. I don't like Jadis as a person, I like Tilda Swinton who did a FANTASTIC job as the white witch. I just found that the dialogue was too boring and stilted. But then again, that is my own opinion, not that of others..

 

[Malacandra]

Ok I must really be missing something what book are you all talking about? Lion having sex of that is just...what is this?

It's a short story by Neil Gaiman, "The Problem of Susan". I've seen the rumours flying around the internet, but I've not read the story.

Thanks, SailorSaturn13, for a good and helpful reply. Of course, Greta's perspective on God's "unfairness" might possibly be a little flawed...

 

[pink-cheetah]

do you think that when Susan died, and if she did "grow out of nylons and lipstick", she could always pass from the 'England-within-England" into"Narnia-within-Narnia" like Mr. Tumnus said somethng about all the countries are connected or something from Aslan's country?

 

[LadyEm]

I don't think that The Forgiven Traitor was saying that any of those books listed are not classics - they very much are. Each author has their different points of view, in which they write from - which is why looking at Lewis' writing tells a lot about him.

In a way, Tolkein would have agreed with you devil's advocate - he always complained that it was way to "hodge podge" for his taste.
Secondarily, the witch was a psycho. It's Lewis' character, he created Jadis. If he writes her as being psycho, then she is indeed psycho. There would be no Jadis without Lewis, therefore, Jadis is a figment of Lewis' imagination, whom we enjoy but must accept as who she is.

Backtowards the topic at hand - Forgiven Traitor - I completely agree. I myself started off reading the books, and then saw the BBC movies and finally the brand new one - the books really are the final word, so speaking from the books is an excellent place to start.

You see, those are the answers that I draw from the Chronicles as well, in not so much words or evidence. It has been many years since I've read them (due to loads of homework and reading in college, etc).
It really amazes me at the conclusion of some of the critics because I don't follow their logic based upon research that has been twisted into their own interpretation.

You did an excellent of job of defending Lewis' works. I appreciate it - and Lewis has been one of the greatest inspirations in my life - he inspired me to write novels, he also inspired me in my faith in numerous ways. I can honestly say that I too, hope to become even a fraction of the quality of the man Lewis was - well, as a woman of course.

As for Susan - the one thing I do partly agree with in the book she was reading - was that when her family and friends - all those closest to her died in that train accident, that it was bound to affect her. It is very likely that the grief of such a thing would be very crippling, and that it would cause some sort of turn around in her life.

I think though, pondering it that Lewis was rather ingenious to pick Susan to stay behind, and yet leave her story open ended. The debate and the deep thought provoking that he has caused in people's heart's and mind's is really quite amazing.

When I first read The Last Battle, I cried and cried for Susan. I couldn't help it, but I also didn't realize the full impact of what Lewis was trying to do. Also, in no way did Lewis say that she could not have another chance - after all if she didn't have another chance, that would completely defeat the theme of grace throughout the books, following Edmund and his friendship with the White Witch and Aslan's ultimate sacrifice.

I think that if Lewis wanted to be sexist, he would not have had the girls come on an adventure in the first place - or have Lucy lead it by any means at all. And no, Lucy would not have been the most beloved of Aslan, as you've pointed out. Nor would Lu have engaged in battles as a Queen, or led any for that matter. Perhaps we should just edit Lu and Su completely out of the adventure and leave them behind in Narnia and have the High King Pete meet up with Tumnus?

Anyways, Lewis also has several Calormene's being of importance in Narnia - for example Aravis, the friend of Shasta's was, I believe a Calormene princess for all intensive purposes. And she became a Queen of Archenland after marrying Shasta(prince corin) who turned out to be the heir to the throne of Archenland.