Just lovely. I'm not familiar with the book or with Hwin, but it's not really necessary in order to enjoy this story and understand the characters and appreciate the insights. I never finished the Narnia books (they made me angry, for various reasons, as a child), but from what I remember of Aslan, you've captured him well. And the "horse-ness" of Hwin comes through well, too. (Is Lewis borrowing from Swift for her name, do you know?)
My favorite lines/bits:
--the ending --The scents were coming from the other side, carried by the wind; they were rich and familiar, holding nothing but promises. --"Freedom is a strange gift," Aslan said. "It is both wonderful and merciless: dumb slaves may follow their masters unconditionally in return for oats and grooming, but free Horses of Narnia must follow their own heart, even if it means getting their coat full of dirt." I just love this.
Thanks so much, Kelly -- I'm glad you enjoyed this, even if you haven't read the novel in question!
(Is Lewis borrowing from Swift for her name, do you know?)
According to Wikipedia, yes. :-P
(Heh, it's funny to hear that the Narnia books made you angry as a child... While there are some things there I do have issues with, they're mostly things I never thought about when I was little, and they haven't had any impact on my overall love of the series. My issues with HP, on the other hand -- well, let's just say those books piss me off much more, although that may have something to do with the infuriating fact that JKR seems to think of herself as oh-so-progressive when her books are anything but.)
//(Is Lewis borrowing from Swift for her name, do you know?) According to Wikipedia, yes. :-P//
Ach, I could have just looked it up for myself instead of putting you to the trouble /g/ But it's interesting; I love that sort of inter-textuality.
the infuriating fact that JKR seems to think of herself as oh-so-progressive when her books are anything but
Exactly! I have similar "issues" with HP -- every time I reread a section of one of the books, I'm annoyed anew. Why I'm so sucked into that world, I don't know.
With Narnia, I couldn't articulate my objections as a child; I just knew that it irritated me that Lewis couldn't seem to get the girls right.
It was no trouble at all; I'm a big fan of intertextuality myself. (Although I also like the almost-homophony of Hwin - wind!)
Why I'm so sucked into that world, I don't know.
Same here. I think, however, that HP's imperfectness may be the very reason why it lends itself so easily to fanfic -- you can twist and bend things at your choice, and you'll never run out of plot holes that need to be 'fixed'. I just wished Rowling would stop going on about how her books are 'a protracted plea for tolerance', thus trying to imply that everyone who has issues with them are intolerant fundamentalists... :-/
I just knew that it irritated me that Lewis couldn't seem to get the girls right
See, this is interesting, because I've always thought Narnia has great female characters -- Lucy is perhaps the most famous one (in The Horse and His Boy we learn that she is a warrior queen), but also Aravis (Hwin's former 'owner') and Polly (from The Magician's Nephew, the first book) are characters whose courageous personalities are in no way lacking in
( ... )
I didn't like that she was "Susan the Gentle" and seemed the least interesting and (in my memory) was expected to behave rather maternally.
Susan's probably the series' most 'stereotypically feminine' character in many ways, especially in The Horse and His Boy, where her role basically is to be coveted by the bad guy (although it's mentioned both here and in other novels that she's an excellent archer). I do like the fanfics where Susan proves herself a shrewd negotiator, using her reputation as 'the Gentle' as an advantage, though. :-D
evil women whose villainy isn't explained by jealousy over someone else as more attractive or rage at not having their own children or being dumped by a prince, etc.
*nods*
The White Witch is basically your typical megalomaniac despot -- we're given her backstory in The Magician's Nephew, where it turns out she destroyed her former empire by using a magic word that ended all life, rather than risk losing her throne to her sister (this happened at the end of a long and bloody civil war). There is
( ... )
I liked the fact that the word that ended all life and ended the war, (the one that the other side and maybe her own followers believed was never going to be used and was only a bluff) was an obvious symbol of the Nucleaqr Arsenal. At least this was what I surmised reading it as an adult to my children. It was the cold war when I read the book and when Lewis wrote it. There were people who spoke seriously of using the weapons, (better dead than red applied to more than the Vietnamese) rather than risk being defeated. I loved that Lewis allowed the white witch to represent those people and the attitude that they represented.
I didn't like how in the movie of The Lion the Witch and the Wadrobe Peter is presented as the hero of the book, when Lucy was so obiously the most important character. Yes what they portrayed appeared in the book, but it was a matter of emphasis. No one reads the book The Lion the Witch and the Wadrobe thinking anyone but Lucy is the character to watch.
That's true; I'd forgotten about Alecto Carrow. The female Death Eaters are still outnumbered by the male ones, though.
I didn't like how in the movie of The Lion the Witch and the Wadrobe Peter is presented as the hero of the book, when Lucy was so obiously the most important character.
I've only seen the movie once, and it's been years already, but you're right about this -- it's like in the movie verson of Prince Caspian, where they add this huge conflict between Peter and Caspian and make it seem like the story is all about their rivalry. (Also, now that I'm thinking of it, the filmmakers seem to miss several crucial points -- for instance, in the LWW movie Aslan sacrifices himself as part of a bargain, so that the Witch will leave Narnia alone, while in the book he sacrifices himself for Edmund, the way Christ sacrificed himself for every one of us. I mean, I'm an atheist and I get that -- so why don't the movie people?)
I was just being cute with the Carrow reference. Two is little better than one.
I think they were trying to downplay the Christian imagery. The question is were they trying to downplay the more active female character and instead make the movie more normal?
That's the question for me.
It surprised me, but my daughter wouldn't watch the movie. The book had meant too much to her when she was young to risk watching the movie.
I don't know, I think the sacrifice as presented in the movie doesn't make much sense, and I'd rather they keep it the way it was meant to be -- if only to show how deeply Aslan cares for everyone (i.e., Edmund). Oh well.
The question is were they trying to downplay the more active female character and instead make the movie more normal?
"I don't know, I think the sacrifice as presented in the movie doesn't make much sense, and I'd rather they keep it the way it was meant to be -- if only to show how deeply Aslan cares for everyone (i.e., Edmund). Oh well."
My favorite lines/bits:
--the ending
--The scents were coming from the other side, carried by the wind; they were rich and familiar, holding nothing but promises.
--"Freedom is a strange gift," Aslan said. "It is both wonderful and merciless: dumb slaves may follow their masters unconditionally in return for oats and grooming, but free Horses of Narnia must follow their own heart, even if it means getting their coat full of dirt." I just love this.
Reply
(Is Lewis borrowing from Swift for her name, do you know?)
According to Wikipedia, yes. :-P
(Heh, it's funny to hear that the Narnia books made you angry as a child... While there are some things there I do have issues with, they're mostly things I never thought about when I was little, and they haven't had any impact on my overall love of the series. My issues with HP, on the other hand -- well, let's just say those books piss me off much more, although that may have something to do with the infuriating fact that JKR seems to think of herself as oh-so-progressive when her books are anything but.)
Reply
According to Wikipedia, yes. :-P//
Ach, I could have just looked it up for myself instead of putting you to the trouble /g/ But it's interesting; I love that sort of inter-textuality.
the infuriating fact that JKR seems to think of herself as oh-so-progressive when her books are anything but
Exactly! I have similar "issues" with HP -- every time I reread a
section of one of the books, I'm annoyed anew. Why I'm so sucked into that world, I don't know.
With Narnia, I couldn't articulate my objections as a child; I just knew that it irritated me that Lewis couldn't seem to get the girls right.
Reply
Why I'm so sucked into that world, I don't know.
Same here. I think, however, that HP's imperfectness may be the very reason why it lends itself so easily to fanfic -- you can twist and bend things at your choice, and you'll never run out of plot holes that need to be 'fixed'. I just wished Rowling would stop going on about how her books are 'a protracted plea for tolerance', thus trying to imply that everyone who has issues with them are intolerant fundamentalists... :-/
I just knew that it irritated me that Lewis couldn't seem to get the girls right
See, this is interesting, because I've always thought Narnia has great female characters -- Lucy is perhaps the most famous one (in The Horse and His Boy we learn that she is a warrior queen), but also Aravis (Hwin's former 'owner') and Polly (from The Magician's Nephew, the first book) are characters whose courageous personalities are in no way lacking in ( ... )
Reply
Reply
Susan's probably the series' most 'stereotypically feminine' character in many ways, especially in The Horse and His Boy, where her role basically is to be coveted by the bad guy (although it's mentioned both here and in other novels that she's an excellent archer). I do like the fanfics where Susan proves herself a shrewd negotiator, using her reputation as 'the Gentle' as an advantage, though. :-D
evil women whose villainy isn't explained by jealousy over someone else as more attractive or rage at not having their own children or being dumped by a prince, etc.
*nods*
The White Witch is basically your typical megalomaniac despot -- we're given her backstory in The Magician's Nephew, where it turns out she destroyed her former empire by using a magic word that ended all life, rather than risk losing her throne to her sister (this happened at the end of a long and bloody civil war). There is ( ... )
Reply
I liked the fact that the word that ended all life and ended the war, (the one that the other side and maybe her own followers believed was never going to be used and was only a bluff) was an obvious symbol of the Nucleaqr Arsenal. At least this was what I surmised reading it as an adult to my children. It was the cold war when I read the book and when Lewis wrote it. There were people who spoke seriously of using the weapons, (better dead than red applied to more than the Vietnamese) rather than risk being defeated. I loved that Lewis allowed the white witch to represent those people and the attitude that they represented.
I didn't like how in the movie of The Lion the Witch and the Wadrobe Peter is presented as the hero of the book, when Lucy was so obiously the most important character. Yes what they portrayed appeared in the book, but it was a matter of emphasis. No one reads the book The Lion the Witch and the Wadrobe thinking anyone but Lucy is the character to watch.
Reply
I didn't like how in the movie of The Lion the Witch and the Wadrobe Peter is presented as the hero of the book, when Lucy was so obiously the most important character.
I've only seen the movie once, and it's been years already, but you're right about this -- it's like in the movie verson of Prince Caspian, where they add this huge conflict between Peter and Caspian and make it seem like the story is all about their rivalry. (Also, now that I'm thinking of it, the filmmakers seem to miss several crucial points -- for instance, in the LWW movie Aslan sacrifices himself as part of a bargain, so that the Witch will leave Narnia alone, while in the book he sacrifices himself for Edmund, the way Christ sacrificed himself for every one of us. I mean, I'm an atheist and I get that -- so why don't the movie people?)
Reply
I think they were trying to downplay the Christian imagery. The question is were they trying to downplay the more active female character and instead make the movie more normal?
That's the question for me.
It surprised me, but my daughter wouldn't watch the movie. The book had meant too much to her when she was young to risk watching the movie.
Reply
The question is were they trying to downplay the more active female character and instead make the movie more normal?
Wouldn't surprise me one bit. :-(
Reply
I agree one hundred percent.
Reply
Leave a comment