15971Re: [mythsoc] Defense of Narnia against Pullman
- Dec 7, 2005At 01:57 PM 12/7/2005 -0500, alexeik@... wrote:
>Nowhere in _His Dark Materials_ (or in any of his criticism of Lewis thatI no longer have the original article, but I recall that the Pullman
>I've read) does Pullman refer in any way to Christian scripture, or indeed
>engage in any kind of meaningful argument with Christian belief or doctrine.
statement I was responding to cited the New Testament as saying the highest
value was love and declared that love was totally absent from Narnia.
Thus, Pullman referring to Christian scripture in the course of his
criticism of Lewis.
>In specific relation to Lewis, my impression is that hisWhich proves that he hasn't read the books, since 1) all of the Pevensies
>main concern is the fate of Susan, which he sees as the main scandal of
>Narnia. He attributes Lewis's disapproval of Susan not to her having become
>shallow and vain in her adolescence (as Lewis describes), but to her having
>undergone sexual awakening.
are post-pubescent by the time of the "Susan is no longer a friend of
Narnia" conversation; 2) Susan, and the others, had undergone sexual
awakening to the extent of courtship in the final chapter of LWW.
>While "Turkish Delight" in LWW does have a connotation of sensual pleasure,Sure, but that's only the worst example. All the good characters love
>the fact that it plays a negative role would only exarcebate Pullman's
Aslan. Does Pullman think that a) that's sexual; b) if not sexual, bad; c)
that non-sexual love is not a justified use of the word "love"? If A or B,
he's a sick little puppy; if C, he's flying in the face of every English
translation of Jesus that I've ever heard of. That's the question I'm
trying to ask: is it A, B, or C, and if none of the above, what am I missing?
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>