Automoderated users, edit
2,403
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 34:
Line 34: + + + + + +
Talk:The Chronicles of Narnia (view source)
Revision as of 01:48, January 17, 2009
, 01:48, January 17, 2009→Religious Criticisms
:Thank you for the compliments. I wrote some of the criticisms because there are Christians who see these books as a perversion endorsing magic. Instead of stating this in such explicit terms, I tried to convey some of the specific issues we have with the books without explicitly calling them a false allegory intended to lead children astray. Listing a handful of criticisms is, I think, a compromise between those who see Narnia as a loose retelling of Christian cosmology and those who see it as a way to pervert a child's image of Christ, The Trinity and reality in general.--[[User:AlexC|AlexC]] 23:11, 11 January 2009 (EST)
:Thank you for the compliments. I wrote some of the criticisms because there are Christians who see these books as a perversion endorsing magic. Instead of stating this in such explicit terms, I tried to convey some of the specific issues we have with the books without explicitly calling them a false allegory intended to lead children astray. Listing a handful of criticisms is, I think, a compromise between those who see Narnia as a loose retelling of Christian cosmology and those who see it as a way to pervert a child's image of Christ, The Trinity and reality in general.--[[User:AlexC|AlexC]] 23:11, 11 January 2009 (EST)
There are two issues in play. First, the policy of criticisms has to be done a bit more carefully so that it's not just a discussion section, I think a good way of mending this would be to find references of well-known thinkers, who agree with you. Now, I'm not booing any and all criticisms of the books. I too have some qualms with them. I think for example universalism is creeping into the Last Battle, as well as historical pessimism.
Second, here's the problem with some critics. You want to be specific, but some of the evidence is incorrect, badly interpreted or isolated. Taking the celibacy argument. This is somewhat isolated information, which refers to one example, Susan's. However in the other books characters get married (Aravis and Shasta) and are married (Mr. & Mrs. Beaver.) Also, you have to look at other Lewis books and how he talks about marriage there. ([[That Hideous Strength]] is climaxed by the reunion of a husband and wife beautifully.)
Finally, I just want to thank you for returning my comments. I think you have rightly motivated concerns. While we will probably disagree alot, I think we could have a very good analysis on this. Perhaps this could be moved to a debate page so that it doesn't take up to much room if discussion becomes to long. Thank-you. -[[User:Additioner|Additioner]] 20:48, 16 January 2009 (EST)