Interesting article from a British Muslim

MrBob

MrBob

Well-known member
An article from the Hufington Post has a man who grew up in England with Pakistani parents who came to England when he was a baby.

This man talks of his love of Narnia as a child (including his love of Jill), but falling out of love with Narnia due to the descriptions of Calormenes as well as some bad experiences with some Christians whom he felt didn't respect his own Muslim beliefs.

It is an interesting read. And remember, he can't be too bad since he liked Jill so much :D

MrBob
 
Very intriguing article! His perspective on the series is one that I haven't taken much time to consider, so I enjoyed hearing his point of view. It raises a lot of important questions about religion, but also offers insight on how literature affects us differently as we mature.
 
It was interesting seeing the books from another perspective. I was always intrigued by the Calormene culture, though personally I thought it was more traditional-Indian than Islamic...

I don't know whether or not Lewis was intentional in his portrayal of the Calormene. After all, it is very difficult to leave behind ideas that you grew up with. I, for example, could probably never write a book written from the perspective of a Chinese child, simply because all through growing up I read books with white heroes and heroines. And this would naturally limit the foreign culture within the books to something non-white, and thus accusations of racism.

I guess I have just learned to accept some form or other of racism in older books (though having a blond-haired, blue-eyed Mary was too much to stomach even for me in Ben-Hur). For example, I enjoyed the Dr. Fu-Manchu books over Christmas, even if they are about "the yellow peril incarnate in one man." :rolleyes:

But then, I guess we Chinese don't really have to deal with too much racism in this day and age, while sadly, Central Asians are not viewed too favorably in the West. Having daily to deal with discrimination which is so lively in our culture would make it much harder to be forgiving of that in the past.
 
Last edited:
Imran's story impresses me, he is spot on... I don't know the intentions of Lewis and no one can know but Imran made a great point that these books are great when you are younger because you are not much into religion, it is a story about hope, justice, love, etc. But once you grow older you look at it as a religious story and that were where you mess up.
 
I always assumed Lewis wasn't trying to draw parallels to Islam, exactly because he made the Calormens idol-worshipers -- but the idea of Saracens vs Crusaders never occurred to me, although it probably should have, considering the illustrations; the children's clothing, when they're kings and queens of Narnia and especially engaged in battle, looks crusader-ish.

Perhaps though he was going for something more Arabian-Nights and pre-Islamic, Persian, maybe, in Calormen? I would hate to think he intended to make Muslim kids feel bad. I can't think that of him.
 
The thing is that no one can look at the world of today and apply it to what was written decades ago. In the early part of the 20th century, the British Empire had inroads throughout the Middle East and they were places of intrigue for fictional British authors.

MrBob
 
While I don't think Lewis is being specifically anti-Islamic, it has always been very obvious to me that the Calormene imagery is largely drawn from Islamic cultures. Whenever I read of Tashbaan I think of Constantinople (not sure why - I've never even been there and the geography is rather different - but I guess the temple at Tashbaan's summit perhaps parallels the Hagia Sophia, and both are capitals of vast, hot, southern empires!) and the Tisroc seems to be modelled on the Sultan. The desert is reminiscent of Arabia, while the dark skins suggest Arabs and the mode of speech seems to belong to the Qur'an, as well as the poetry and proverbs seeming to have an Islamic resonance.

However, I don't think it's about Islam. I think it's just that all Lewis's Narnia books have a medieval motif, and so obviously Narnia will be based on medieval England, and obviously the great threat will be based on the great threat of medieval Europe - ie. the vast Islamic Empire that seemed poised to capture and swallow up Europe. If he had taken the 20th century as his motif, the enemy would doubtless have looked rather Soviet (or perhaps Nazi, given when Lewis was writing); if the late Roman Empire, Gothic; if the Dark Ages, Viking. I don't think it's anti-Islamic, it's just that Lewis loved the medieval imagery, and the Islamic threat belongs naturally with that.

Let it also be noted that Calromenes are not even mentioned until the third book (VDT) and not discussed in any detail until the fifth (HHB) and seventh (TLB) books in the series. Much more medieval imagery was explored before turning to the 'great enemy'.

Moreover, even if it is anti-Islamic, the stories of Aravis and Emeth suggest that it is not anti-Muslim.

Peeps
 
Last edited:
It was definitely an interesting article, and it was an opportunity to look at the Chronicles of Narnia from a Muslim perspective, which is neat. I won't question Imran Ahmad's feelings as he read the books, and I will also say that it can be very hurtful to encounter what you see as caricatures of your culture or religion in a form of popular media. I've felt that pain, and I wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy, which Mr. Ahmad is not.

That being said, I never really saw the Calormenes as being Muslim. I think that Lewis was thinking of the Middle East when he wrote about the Calormenes. That seemed obvious from the descriptions of architecture, the weapons, and from the elaborate forms of address, as well as the description of the horns to announce the opening and closing of the city. The food also seemed very Middle Eastern influenced, but, overall, when I read Horse and His Boy I got the sense of a certain fascination with a foreign culture rather than a hatred of it. He writes about the buildings and gardens of Tashbaan in a way that makes them sound very attractive. He also describes the food in a way that I saw as pretty appetizing. He also seems to respect the Calormene focus on storytelling. He points out that it is much more useful than essay-writing:D

I kind of saw the fact that the Calormenes were described as polytheistic as an indication that they weren't based on Muslims who are (staunchly) monotheistic. I thought that more hinted that the Calormenes were based on pre-Islamic peoples, but that could be just my reading of the story.

I also think that it is worth remembering that Lewis when describing the Calormenes in books like VotD is always careful to include compliments in addition to criticisms, and it was only after Lewis had written about light-skinned villains like the White Witch and Miraz that he looked at a Calormene villian, who, in my opinion, came off as less evil (and more comical and even sympathetic) than the White Witch or Miraz.

I also would like to say that the Calormenes I most remember are Aravis and Emeth, who are very real, noble, strong, brave, and faithful people. Moreover, I read them as getting those virtues because of their upbringing (which instilled a strong moral code in them) so I read them as being good because they were true Calormenes, not despite the fact that they were Calormene.

The Calormene portrayed least sympathetically in Last Battle, at least in my reading, is the one who is not loyal to his belief system, saying that Aslan and Tash are one (and seeming to really believe that neither Aslan nor Tash exist). In a way, the worst Calormene in the Last Battle is bad because he is a false Calormene, not a true one.

In my reading, the emphasis in Last Battle that Aslan and Tash are not one wasn't meant to be an attack on the Islamic position that Allah and God are different words for the same God (many Christians believe that Allah is another name for God, and that Muslims do worship God the Father). I read it more as an attack on the modernist position that all gods are the same, and that all gods are one. In essence, I saw it more as an attack on the modern argument that God and Zeus are the same, or that God and Vishnu are the same.

That's just my perspective, though. I could be woefully wrong, but I thought I'd offer an alternative reading.
 
The Fourth Sura of the Koran flatly states that Allah HAS NO SON. This is a head-on denial of the Triune nature of the Christian God, and all by itself it is adequate proof that Islam IS NOT compatible with Christianity. They demand that we respect them; but respecting them as persons does not obligate us to overlook the fact that THEY contradict US.

As for the Calormenes, they ARE depicted as polytheistic, so no one needs to see them as Muslims.
 
Copperfox said:
The Fourth Sura of the Koran flatly states that Allah HAS NO SON. This is a head-on denial of the Triune nature of the Christian God, and all by itself it is adequate proof that Islam IS NOT compatible with Christianity. They demand that we respect them; but respecting them as persons does not obligate us to overlook the fact that THEY contradict US.

As for the Calormenes, they ARE depicted as polytheistic, so no one needs to see them as Muslims.
Click to expand...


The Calormenes are indeed polytheistic, and, in that way, not based on Muslims at all. I guess I should also say that I see the Calormenes as being more of a race/ethnicity and their polytheism (with a particular focus on Tash being a sort of chief god) as being their religion. That was also one of the differences I saw between Calormenes and Muslims, actually, because, while the Calormenes, in my mind, were one race, Muslims come from many races.

Therefore, it was entirely possible, in my mind, for Aravis and Emeth to believe in Aslan and still remain Calormene, because their race wouldn't change when their polytheism did. (In the same way, it would be possible for a Muslim to be raised in the Middle East, become a Christian, and still remain Middle Eastern.) Hmm. I don't know if any of what I'm saying makes sense. That's probably a sign I should go to bed...
 
Sunshine said:
I also would like to say that the Calormenes I most remember are Aravis and Emeth, who are very real, noble, strong, brave, and faithful people. Moreover, I read them as getting those virtues because of their upbringing (which instilled a strong moral code in them) so I read them as being good because they were true Calormenes, not despite the fact that they were Calormene.
Click to expand...
Very nicely said; I like that.
 
>>> I have a Muslim friend and he believes that Jesus was the son of Allah and a great prophet, so therefore he considers Christianity and Islam equal. I don't consider them the same but of course it always confuses me when people compare Christianity with my own faith which are quite different in my mind.

Forbearne, I _have_ read what the Koran says, and it _does_ say that Allah has no son. If your Muslim friend calls Jesus the Son of Allah, he is contradicting his _own_ holy book. It's perfectly possible that your friend really _doesn't_ know what Islam teaches, because "official" copies of the Koran have to be in Arabic, and there are many Muslims who don't even _know_ Arabic. They memorize Koranic passages _phonetically_ without always knowing the meaning.

As a non-messianic Jew, you of course do not believe Jesus to be a uniquely divine being superior to all mortals (including Muhammad). But you openly _admit_ that you do not believe this, and your position is based on our _knowledge_ of what it is you have been taught. This puts you in a less confused position than your Muslim friend seems to be in.

Members of _every_ faith-group are welcome to join here; but the welcome does not suspend the logical law of non-contradiction. "Statement A" and "Contradictory-Opposite-of-A" _cannot_ both be true at the same time. Christians believe at once that Jesus is part of God Himself, and that He is the _only_ human being of Whom this can _ever_ be said. Any other belief system which says this _isn't_ true, is by definition _not_ the same thing as Christianity.

This is not a declaration of hostility toward anyone, only a statement of logic. If my belief turns out to be true, then whatever contradicts it is _inevitably_ wrong. If one of the contradictions turns out to be true, then my own belief is _inevitably_ wrong. I love having friendship and goodwill with people; but no amount of goodwill can change the fact that _somewhere_ there is truth, and whatever turns out to be the truth, _won't_ be "the same" as ideas which had contradicted it.
 
If God exists at all, then it is at least possible that He _does_ have some kind of preferences for the _whole_ world, not only for individuals one at a time. This possibility should not be simply dismissed; and it needs to be understood that we _can_ be trying to know His overall will, _without_ this meaning that we wish any harm to those who disagree with us.

Ideas have consequences. What we believe _will_ affect our actions, no matter how "private" we think our beliefs are. Mutually-exclusive ideas are in competition, even if the competition is entirely courteous and friendly. Modern people often think that they can sidestep the competition by saying, "All beliefs are the same;" but it doesn't work. It can't work, because in reality the concept "All beliefs are the same" IS ITSELF one of the _competing_ ideas. If I say, "All beliefs are the same," I'll be dogmatically contradicting _everyone_ who maintains that one _specific_ belief is more true.

So everyone has a horse in the race, no matter what. Better to be intellectually honest and _admit_ that there is a competition of ideas, because you can make this admission without hating anyone.

If you read my "Alipang Havens" stories, or for that matter my poems, you will find me expressing Christian ideas. No one is forcing you to agree with them, but I _will_ express them. You have the same right to express your own ideas. Remember that C.S. Lewis was able to be genuinely friends with some men at the same time as he was having furious intellectual arguments with them.

Speaking of which: we have a thread in Socratic Club called "Avoidance of Hijacking," which is intended to accommodate digressions from topics. This thread I'm posting on right now is intended for discussion of a certain article; so a broader discussion of comparative religions could appropriately be moved over to the "Avoidance" thread.
 
With regard to Muslims accepting Jesus as the Son of God:
Hmm said:
Say:
He is Allah, the One and Only;
Allah, the Eternal, Absolute;
He begetteth not, nor is He begotten;
And there is none comparable unto Him.
Click to expand...
This is about as clear a statement of the non-deity and non-Sonship of Jesus as you can get - and that was its intention. Any Muslim who believes that Jesus is the Son of God would be widely regarded as a heretic, if not an apostate, because the non-equality of anyone or anything with God is a core Muslim belief.

To get back to the main topic of the thread, with regard to the Calormene-Islam thing: it is really obvious that Lewis is drawing imagery from Islamic cultures. He isn't trying to make any particular points about Islamic faith, I don't think (beyond that Islam and Christianity are not the same as each other), but to say that he isn't talking about Islamic cultures because Calormene religion is polytheistic completely misses the point. If I wrote a story that contained imagery that was clearly reminiscent of your town or country or church or whatever, and you found it offensive, you wouldn't be fobbed off by me pointing to differences between the place in my story and the one in reality. Either Lewis did have Islamic cultures in mind as he crafted his images of Calormene or else he was idiotically negligent! Since there is strong evidence to discount the latter alternative, I'm going with the former.

Incidentally, how do you pronounce 'Calormen' and 'Calormene'? I've always gone with KAL-or-men and KAL-or-meen, but I have heard people go with Ka-LOR-men (don't know how they then pronounce Calormene) and I have once heard 'Calormene' pronounced 'KAL-or-MAY-nay'.

forbearne said:
However, isn't it also true that every religion believes itself to be the truth and all could provide ample, rational proof for them believing so? I've heard incredibly convincing arguments for many religions that I personally don't believe, yet I entirely respect, support, and don't attempt to convert those who believe as such. I feel religions can compare and coexist without having to be changed in any way; or in other words, learning and sharing won't influence a core belief system unless it's not set to begin with. So, wouldn't religion be a personal truth and not a universal one as there's no human or science on earth that can 100% prove that their god is "The G-d"?
Click to expand...
I'm going to respond to this across in 'Hijacking, as CF has done.

Peeps
 
I agree on pronouncing the term for the people as "KAL-or-meen." I heard someplace that Lewis intended the NATION'S name to be pronounced "ka-LOR-men."

And I would say that Lewis did mean the Calormenes to be at least similar to Muslims in some respects, but he was not flatly stating, "THIS IS what real-world Muslims are like."
 
I would definitely agree that Lewis was drawing on Middle Eastern cultures, many of which have roots in Islam, but I think he was more drawing on cultural elements (food, dress, architecture, forms of address) than on religious elements, since the religious elements associated with the Calormene people don't match with the religious beliefs that Muslims claim to believe.

I also think that the overall portrayal of these cultural elements is not really biased against them. Lewis includes both praises and critiques of the Calormene culture (for instance, praising the gardens and stories, but critiquing some of the brutality). So, I wouldn't argue that Calormene culture isn't based on Middle Eastern ones, but I would argue that the Calormene religion (polytheistic with a particular devotion to Tash) is not meant to be based on Islam, and, if anything, may be inspired by pre-Islamic beliefs.

I also don't see Lewis as being biased against people of Calormene descent. Aravis and Emeth, as I said before, were not portrayed as stereotypes, but rather as upstanding people because of the moral code that their culture had instilled with them. To me, they are good people because they live according to the principles (such as courage and loyalty) their culture has taught them to value, so they are good because they are Calormene, not despite of it.

In terms of their religion (which I don't think was really meant to represent Islam), while both Emeth and Aravis ultimately reject the polytheism they were raised to believe, with Emeth we really see Lewis suggesting that, even though the religion followed by the Calormenes is wrong, Calormenes who devotedly followed the truth as much as they could discover it would be saved. If Heaven is the ultimate goal, it's nice to know that you can get there even if you are wrong:D Lewis can hardly be expected violate his own belief and to end the series saying that everyone who believed in Aslan was wrong, or that all beliefs are equally correct, so I think that the series ended as well as it could for people like Emeth, who certainly had no complaints about Aslan's behavior toward him. Therefore, I still really don't see a reason for Muslims to get all bent out of shape about what Lewis says about the religion associated with the Calormene culture. I mean, they didn't expect a Christian series to end with the declaration that Muslims (if the Calormene religion is even meant to represent Islam) are right and Christians have been wrong all along, did they?

If people want to insist despite the clear, shining contrary examples of Aravis and Emeth that Lewis was a racist or some other type of bigot and that there is no good place for non-whites in Lewis' world, well, I really can't help them out. If they want to read the series in a negative fashion, that is their right, but I think that it takes a lot of selective quoting and limited interpretation to support that view, and as an English major I'm wary of that brand of literary criticism.

By the way, I don't mean to sound angry or hostile. I'm not mad at anyone on this thread, lol. I just get kind of irritated when anyone selectively quotes from the Narnia books to argue that Lewis was a sexist or racist, when, in my opinion, the text supports quite the opposite conclusion.
 
SunshineRose said:
By the way, I don't mean to sound angry or hostile. I'm not mad at anyone on this thread, lol. I just get kind of irritated when anyone selectively quotes from the Narnia books to argue that Lewis was a sexist or racist, when, in my opinion, the text supports quite the opposite conclusion.
Click to expand...
I'm with you, to an extent. I love the Narnia books, and I love CS Lewis's forthrightness in saying without fear what he actually thinks. However, I think you may be doing the inverse of what you criticise others for. Are you really saying that Lewis intends us to come away with a positive view of Calormenes? Yes, there are individual good Calormenes, and yes there are praiseworthy aspects of their culture. But overall, the plain sense you get from reading the books is that Narnians are the goodies and Calormenes are the baddies.

Lewis also has some rather archaic views about boys and girls which seem out of place today. Some of them I think he would repudiate if he were still alive today. But given that he was in his fifties when he wrote these books some sixty years ago, and was fairly old fashioned in his views even for his time, I think we can forgive the fact that his views seem a bit nineteenth century! It doesn't spoil the books for me - actually, it enhances them. I don't think he is uncharitable. I don't think it is fair to brand him a sexist or a racist, given the time he was writing and the culture he grew up in. But if he expressed the same views today I think he probably would be sexist and racist, or at least bordering on it.

Peeps
 
Peepiceek said:
I'm with you, to an extent. I love the Narnia books, and I love CS Lewis's forthrightness in saying without fear what he actually thinks. However, I think you may be doing the inverse of what you criticise others for. Are you really saying that Lewis intends us to come away with a positive view of Calormenes? Yes, there are individual good Calormenes, and yes there are praiseworthy aspects of their culture. But overall, the plain sense you get from reading the books is that Narnians are the goodies and Calormenes are the baddies.

Lewis also has some rather archaic views about boys and girls which seem out of place today. Some of them I think he would repudiate if he were still alive today. But given that he was in his fifties when he wrote these books some sixty years ago, and was fairly old fashioned in his views even for his time, I think we can forgive the fact that his views seem a bit nineteenth century! It doesn't spoil the books for me - actually, it enhances them. I don't think he is uncharitable. I don't think it is fair to brand him a sexist or a racist, given the time he was writing and the culture he grew up in. But if he expressed the same views today I think he probably would be sexist and racist, or at least bordering on it.

Peeps
Click to expand...

I think that Lewis intends for us to come across with as balanced a view as possible of the Calormenes given that the Calormenes are set up as antagonists to Narnia in Horse and His Boy and Last Battle . Frankly, based on what is in the text, we could almost as easily make the case that Lewis didn't like white people, because the White Witch is very pale and she is basically evil incarnate. The Telmarines are also white and in PC, the Telmarines are depicted as the antagonists with only a few individually good Telmarines (Caspian, Nurse, Gwendolen, etc.) I don't find that much difference between the treatment of the white Telmarines in PC and the dark-skinned Calormenes in Horse and His Boy and the Last Battle.

I also think that we are more meant to feel dislike for the invasive policies of the Calormen Empire and for the men who order those invasions (i.e. Rabadash), but I never felt like we were supposed to hate all Calormenes or even all the Calormene soldiers.

Yes, they were the enemy empire, but many fantasy stories have an enemy empire, and most fantasy stories never get around to showing good members of that enemy empire, and most of the time people of different countries belong to different races. There's nothing really surprising about that, in my opinion.

Also, for me, even if the Narnians are the good guys and the Calormenes the bad ones, I don't see that as being racist. Most of the Narnians, particularly in Horse and His Boy, are mythical creatures and talking animals. We could, again, almost as easily get the sense that Lewis is anti-human and he's only focusing on a couple of good humans (whom he compliments and critiques) to distract us from that negative message.

As far as the sexism charge goes (which is probably off topic, so I shouldn't have brought it up, lol) I guess I see most of the remarks that people label as sexist as either being part of funny little Battle of the Sexes arguments that people don't really take seriously, as jokes, as a way of characterizing pubescent children who are normally quite advanced for the cooty-stage since most of them have friends of the opposite sex, or as being voiced by characters we aren't meant to like such as Uncle Andrew. Most people who accuse Lewis of sexism just seem not to have gotten a punchline and stomped off in a huff. Chivalry is lauded, but what can we expect from a medieval world?

Honestly, I would rather read about Lucy, Jill, Aravis, and Polly as written by "sexist" Lewis than read about typical "feminist" Mary Sue fantasy girl who is beautiful, funny, smart, fiery, strong, and all-around perfectly unrealistic who is all too common in the genre today. I'll also take his fairly balanced guy-vs-gal cast over the token female common in stories and movies of today. By and large, I actually see a lot more sexism in today's literature (where the woman must either be perfect at both male and female skills to be worthwhile, or else she must take on traditional male roles in order to be interesting).

I do think that Lewis might have written his books differently if he lived in today's society, and that, living in a different world (or rather time in our world), he might have written about relationships between sexes and relationships between races in a manner that reflects modern thoughts. I don't know if he would have agreed with modern thought on everything, but I'm sure, at least, it would have influenced how he chose to write. However, by and large, I don't think that he wanted anyone to come away with the idea that white people are the master race and girls are silly wastes of space. I think within the constraints of his stories and time, he was, on a whole, trying to portray different races and sexes if not in a positive way at least in a balanced way.

Anyway, that's just my two cents, and I don't mean to offend anyone. I just think my opinions are more right than everyone else's:o:D
 
S-R, your points are excellent as usual. Years ago, this forum had an epidemic of Mary Sue-ism, as when one girl insisted that it was the most natural thing in the world for LUCY Pevensie to be superior to PETER at swordfighting.

In a Socratic topic back then about the differences between the sexes, another girl was so frantic to "prove" the absolute superiority of women over men, that she only succeeded in proving SHE was ridiculous. In the context of women in the Armed Forces, she cited a female weightlifter who could lie on her back and hoist huge weights with her legs. I couldn't help envisioning this woman in Afghanistan: "Look out, you Taliban chauvinists, or I'll lie down on my back and throw barbells at you with my feet!"

Unless technology makes profound changes, there WILL always be significant differences in the average abilities of men and women: a tendency, not a rule with no exceptions, but a CLEAR tendency, for men to be stronger, women to have quicker reaction times, etc. And I do think Mr. Lewis was perfectly fair to the female sex. Nobody forced him to depict Aravis as able to wield a sword.
 
Back
Top