# C.S. Lewis - The Chronicles of Narnia



## Kevin D. (Sep 17, 2010)

So anyone else a fan of the Chronicles of Narnia series?  I grew up having these books read to me by my mother and then reading them on my own when I was old enough.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

I am.  They were one of the first series I bought for my Kindle.  I read them in junior high school for the first time, I think.

Betsy


----------



## TWErvin2 (Aug 7, 2010)

I enjoyed reading them as a child. I read several of them to my older daughter as she grew up (five to fifteen minutes at a time before bed).  My younger daughter isn't old enough yet.


----------



## MariaESchneider (Aug 1, 2009)

Absolutely.  Stole the books from my older brother and loved them.  Most excellent.


----------



## mwvickers (Jan 26, 2009)

I am a fan of Lewis in general, so yes.  LOL


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Huge fan.  His Space Trilogy is pretty cool, too   I haven't acquired them for my Kindle yet (a bit miffed that they're $1 higher than the paperback version) but I'm sure I'll give in eventually.


----------



## AJB (Jul 9, 2010)

I read and re-read all of them as a child. I never liked _The Last Battle_ very much, but I must have read the others at least half a dozen times. If not more... 

Amanda


----------



## J.M Pierce (May 13, 2010)

Absolutely!


----------



## luvmy4brats (Nov 9, 2008)

Will I be tarred and feathered if I admit that I don't remember reading them as a kid (but, then again I don't remember a lot of what I know I did read)

I've been slowly reading them and quite frankly I'm not really a fan.


----------



## Guest (Sep 19, 2010)

Mad Ethel Vane said:


> Will I be tarred and feathered if I admit that I don't remember reading them as a kid (but, then again I don't remember a lot of what I know I did read)
> 
> I've been slowly reading them and quite frankly I'm not really a fan.


I was never exposed to them as a kid either. I read the first few in preparation for the movies, but then haven't gone back since. It might be because the books are so short. I'm not sure.


----------



## J.M Pierce (May 13, 2010)

I think this is one of those things that as a child was something fantastic and as an adult, it's a cherished memory. You know how maybe you went and saw something as a kid, and you remember that thing being the coolest, most fantastic, larger than life thing ever. Then twenty years later you take your kids to see that thing and you think to yourself, "that's not as big as I remember it." But then you look at your kids and they have the exact look of amazement on their face that you imagined yourself having when you were their age.

I could see where reading it as an adult would be disappointing, especially if you've seen the movie. I think to read it as an adult, it's best to take yourself back to being ten years old. That's part of the fun for me.


----------



## Valmore Daniels (Jul 12, 2010)

The chronicles were my first fantasy books, and everything else branched out from there.  Going back, of course, is never the same as the first time reading them as a ten-year-old, but I will always have a special place in my heart for this series.


----------



## MLPMom (Nov 27, 2009)

I really loved the Chronicles of Narnia, I read them all in one summer. Sadly, I don't remember hearing about them in school for some reason, it wasn't until about 5 years ago that I even became interested in them and then devoured them all. Of course a year or so later (I think) the first movie came out and I had to watch it. 

I haven't read any of his other work but I was thinking about starting The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe with my two oldest daughters. I think they would really enjoy them. I thought it could be something fun we could all read together.


----------



## Shayne Parkinson (Mar 19, 2010)

Yes! I had LWW read to me at school when I was eight or nine, and gradually acquired the others over the years. We now have a nice hardback version of all seven. They're a fond childhood memory, and I re-read them every now and again.

The first two movies were partially filmed here in New Zealand. A sad note: the grand house filmed as Professor Kirke's home was destroyed in the recent earthquake.


----------



## bvlarson (May 16, 2010)

Unlike Lord of the Rings, I think they are much more clearly aimed at children. I loved them as a kid, but I'm not really into them as an adult. 
-BVL


----------



## Kevin D. (Sep 17, 2010)

OK, so plenty of people here have obviously read them.  So I have a question:

Now, bear in mind that I really enjoyed the series, so I'm not trying to attack it.  But how did The Lion, The Witch, and the Wardobe get past the editor's eyes when the children were never described (that I could find, anyway)?  We learn their ages and personality traites, but where are their physical appearances described?

I notice this sort of thing in a lot of books - things that editors and other authors claim to be "rules" of writing are completely ignored in some of the more respectable titles and even classics.  It just makes me wonder why such rules are pushed so hard when they aren't necessarily needed.

Or am I wrong?  Last time I read The Lion, The Witch, and the Wardrobe was a few years ago just before the movie hit theaters.  Did I accidentally skip some pages? I wouldn't put it beyond myself. lol


----------



## Daphne (May 27, 2010)

ravendta said:


> OK, so plenty of people here have obviously read them. So I have a question:
> 
> Now, bear in mind that I really enjoyed the series, so I'm not trying to attack it. But how did The Lion, The Witch, and the Wardobe get past the editor's eyes when the children were never described (that I could find, anyway)? We learn their ages and personality traites, but where are their physical appearances described?
> 
> ...


What an interesting question. I too have read and enjoyed the Narnia books, although I find they have less enduring appeal than Lord of the Rings and are more dated. I think the fact that the physical appearance children is not described in so many words tells us something about C. S Lewis - a bachelor for more of his life, he never had young children of his own and was incarcerated in the old boy's club atmosphere of Oxford. He was also foremost a Christian and a scholar. I don't suppose he would have thought about appearance as important. Peter, Susan, Lucy and Edmund are conveyed clearly enough - but as moral beings as part of what is essentially a morality tale. As for the editor not questioning - well, Lewis was an Oxford professor of literature, so he might have been a bit nervous. I think you make a good point by concluding that most "rules" of writing are made to be broken if the writer has their own, clear vision of what they want to convey.


----------



## Shayne Parkinson (Mar 19, 2010)

ravendta said:


> OK, so plenty of people here have obviously read them. So I have a question:
> 
> Now, bear in mind that I really enjoyed the series, so I'm not trying to attack it. But how did The Lion, The Witch, and the Wardrobe get past the editor's eyes when the children were never described (that I could find, anyway)? We learn their ages and personality traits, but where are their physical appearances described?
> 
> ...


We're told that Susan has dark hair and Lucy's is golden, but you're right, there's not much else in the way of description. Quite a contrast to (for example) the Harry Potter books.

In Jane Austen's works, too, while we'll be given snippets (e.g Emma's eyes are hazel, and height will often be mentioned), she doesn't generally give detailed description. I think Austen was more interested in showing character than appearance, but are we perhaps more visually-minded than earlier readers? Jane Austen lived before photography, let alone movies, and didn't have the experience of being confronted with the faces of dozens of strangers every day via various media.


----------



## Aravis60 (Feb 18, 2009)

I love this series, but I have to abdmit that I never realized how little description of the kids' physical appearance is in the stories. My copies were illustrated, so I guess I didn't even think about it. This has always been my favorite series, although I realize that there are many out there that might be better written. It doesn't matter. This was the first fantasy series that I read, and it "turned me on" to the genre that has been my favorite ever since. I also love the Space Trilogy (I didn't discover it until college) and pretty much all things Lewis.


----------



## AJB (Jul 9, 2010)

ravendta said:


> OK, so plenty of people here have obviously read them. So I have a question:
> 
> Now, bear in mind that I really enjoyed the series, so I'm not trying to attack it. But how did The Lion, The Witch, and the Wardobe get past the editor's eyes when the children were never described (that I could find, anyway)? We learn their ages and personality traites, but where are their physical appearances described?
> 
> ...


I have to admit that I've never heard of that rule and I'm willing to bet that C.S. Lewis hadn't either! Having said that, my copies of those books were illustrated, so maybe detailed descriptions of the characters were seen as unnecessary.

Amanda


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

I guess I don't think there needed to be physical descriptions of the kids. . . .the descriptions of who they are emotionally and intellectually, how they interact with each other, as well as their fears etc. at their circumstances. . .  all these are much more important than what they look like.


----------



## CNDudley (May 14, 2010)

Shayne Parkinson said:


> We're told that Susan has dark hair and Lucy's is golden, but you're right, there's not much else in the way of description. Quite a contrast to (for example) the Harry Potter books.
> 
> In Jane Austen's works, too, while we'll be given snippets (e.g Emma's eyes are hazel, and height will often be mentioned), she doesn't generally give detailed description. I think Austen was more interested in showing character than appearance, but are we perhaps more visually-minded than earlier readers? Jane Austen lived before photography, let alone movies, and didn't have the experience of being confronted with the faces of dozens of strangers every day via various media.


Good point. As Anne would say, the lack of description leaves us all "more scope for imagination."

I loved reading these to my kids, but to agree with upthread, The Last Battle was something of a snooze for all of us. Love the movies, too, and can't wait for Dawn Treader.


----------



## David &#039;Half-Orc&#039; Dalglish (Feb 1, 2010)

What the kids look like is soooo irrelevant to the overall worth and enjoyment of the series. First and foremost, it was written as a tale for children. I'm fairly certain these young readers were supposed to identify with one of the four children, and giving laborious descriptions of their hair, faces, eyes, chin, etc, would hinder this reader self-insert, as well as being at pretty large odds with how he told the story. He wanted children to be fascinated with talking fawns and lions and beavers...who cares how big Lucy's nose is?

David Dalglish


----------



## purplepen79 (May 6, 2010)

Loved the Narnia series as a child . . . I approached it in the very concrete way children do and didn't realize all of the Christian symbolism until I was older (I wasn't really raised Christian, which is probably why I didn't get it at the time). There is a cozy magic to the Narnia series--for instance, all the food descriptions always make me hungry when I read the Narnia books. Great point about the lack of physical descriptions of the human characters--everyone's answers have been very interesting to read (the original illustrations, btw, are great. Sometimes I just flip through the books to look at those illustrations, particularly the drawing of the Dawn Treader).

Oh, and Lewis did write fiction for older readers if anyone's interested. The series starting with _Out of the Silent Planet _ comes to mind, as well as _The Screwtape Letters_.


----------



## Shayne Parkinson (Mar 19, 2010)

Not a tale of Narnia, and not a book for children, but one of my very favourite books is C.S. Lewis' _Till We Have Faces_, a re-telling of the Cupid and Psyche myth. A wonderful, wonderful book, and one I never tire of re-reading.


----------



## Kevin D. (Sep 17, 2010)

I totally understand and agree with the notion that character descriptions aren't always necessary and that leaving it up to the reader's imagination can be a great thing.

The only reason I brought up the "rules" was because of what an "editor" told me about one of my books years ago (lack of vivid description) and what a few others have said to me in the past.


----------



## purplepen79 (May 6, 2010)

Shayne Parkinson said:


> Not a tale of Narnia, and not a book for children, but one of my very favourite books is C.S. Lewis' _Till We Have Faces_, a re-telling of the Cupid and Psyche myth. A wonderful, wonderful book, and one I never tire of re-reading.


Can't believe I forgot this one . . . ditto on the rec.


----------



## Guest (Sep 21, 2010)

Enjoyed and still enjoy, and i thought that the movies were fairly nice representations. Also loved his sci-fi spcace trilogy, though I fail to remember the name now. It was quite intese.  and took very surprising turns.


----------



## Aravis60 (Feb 18, 2009)

davethedc said:


> Enjoyed and still enjoy, and i thought that the movies were fairly nice representations. Also loved his sci-fi spcace trilogy, though I fail to remember the name now. It was quite intese.  and took very surprising turns.


----------



## J.M Pierce (May 13, 2010)

I just wanted to say a quick thank you to the OP. Thanks to this thread, I took my seven year old son to the library and we are now reading The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe!


----------



## R. M. Reed (Nov 11, 2009)

I read the Narnia books as a kid and completely missed the Christian message. One of the space trilogy is a re-telling of Adam and Eve, and that was pretty obvious.


----------



## Lori Brighton (Jul 10, 2010)

I loved these books! Still do and never noticed the description thing or the religious aspect. I think the 'classics' get away with a lot of things we can't get away with now. I remember some tale about a writer sending an already published classic to an editor and the classic being rejected. maybe its one of those urban myths. lol. 

As for Narnia, anyone ever see the original movie? I loved it! lol. Hilarious now. It should be a cult classic. 

I might have to break out my old copies and reread.


----------



## terryr (Apr 24, 2010)

Loved them. _The Horse and His Boy_ is a particular favorite. For a long time _The Magician's Nephew_ was one I didn't like so much ( detested Uncle Andrew and his picture gave me the creeps, I think, LOL), but as I grew up I appreciated it more. (Now it's _The Silver Chair_ that is my least favorite.)

I adore how Pauline Baynes (sp?) drawings, so charming and uncomplicated, illustrate them. (Imagine how disappointed I was when the Dryads in the movie didn't look like the drawings. )

I grew up with religion but never, ever, assigned any religious overtones to the Narnia books. I don't read them for that. Whether or not the author intended it. (Currently, as someone who follows a more Earth oriented religion, I delight in the fact that creatures such as satyrs, dryads, fauns, and nymphs are respected and beloved citizens of Narnia along with the Talking Animals my rabidly religious mother tried to tell me were sinful and soulless.)

The Chronicles of Narnia will always be in my book collections, virtual and solid.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

purplepen79 said:


> Oh, and Lewis did write fiction for older readers if anyone's interested. The series starting with _Out of the Silent Planet _ comes to mind, as well as _The Screwtape Letters_.


Yepper. That's the first book in what's known as, pretty simply, The Space Trilogy.

As for descriptions - interestingly, I recall fairly good descriptions of various characters in The Magician's Nephew.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

davethedc said:


> Enjoyed and still enjoy, and i thought that the movies were fairly nice representations. Also loved his sci-fi spcace trilogy, though I fail to remember the name now. It was quite intese.  and took very surprising turns.


Just "The Space Trilogy" 

And ugh! I enjoyed Prince Caspian, but they took a LOT of liberty with that and added in some stuff wholesale to it that I don't know that Lewis would have necessarily agreed with.

ETA: The Horse and His Boy has always been my favorite, and will probably keep that honor. My least favorite has changed several times, and now I'd have to say that I love them all, even The Last Battle (sad as it is).


----------



## farrellclaire (Mar 5, 2010)

I loved those books, I got them in the library when I was young and purchased the set a couple of years ago.  I remember desperately wishing my wardrobe could take me into another world.  I would have given anything to go to Narnia.    I reckon those books had an input into my own love of fantasy that has lasted until adulthood.  

I also didn't take away anything religious when I read them.


----------



## Thalia the Muse (Jan 20, 2010)

> The only reason I brought up the "rules" was because of what an "editor" told me about one of my books years ago (lack of vivid description) and what a few others have said to me in the past.


Lewis doesn't describe the children physically (and I think Dave's exactly right, this way children can picture themselves in the roles), but the books are rich with description in general and Narnia is a very vivid place. Certainly, their CHARACTERS are vividly described! Poor Eustace Clarence Scrubb, who almost deserved his name ...


----------

