Re: Digest Number 83
>With, as it happens (I just looked) no lines of dialogue of any kind,
> Message: 1
> Date: Sat, 24 Jul 1999 08:56:03 -0500
> From: Juliet Blosser <juliet@...>
> Subject: Re: Digest Number 81
> > Mrs Beaver is a beaver, not a woman.
> If you won't accept Mrs. Beaver because of her
> shape, what about the
> cab driver's wife who became the first queen of
> Narnia? She was certainly
> a happily married full-grown woman.
and with no part to play in the story, other than to stand proudly
beside her man. I'm not sure what she proves.
>Yes, they romp. But they're scenery. (No dialogue, no active part in
> > I was thinking of the likes of Jadis (as Jadis),
> as The White Witch,
> > The Lady in the Green Kirtle, Lazaraleen...
> Regardless of which characters you were thinking of,
> there are still all
> the many female characters, some more
> anthropomorphic than others, who
> participate in the Romp in Prince Caspian, which I
> think is the most sexual
> happening in all the books. I also still don't see
> what's so particularly
> sexual about the characters that you've mentioned,
> and the fact that you
> think they're sexual makes me wonder about your
> views of female sexuality.
Your unwillingness to notice what's sexual about the characters I
listed makes me wonder about your views of female sexuality.
(Actually it doesn't, but one good Ad Hominem deserves another.)
> I would have to concur with some others that theEr... yes. That's sort of my point.
> witches were primarily
> powerful and power-hungry, and having read some of
> Lewis' adult fiction,
> in his view this would have made them especially
> non-sexual. In the
> last volume of his space trilogy, he expounds on the
> idea that obedience
> and humility are erotic necessities.
>I dunno. That's where it always seems to begin...
> Perhaps Lewis can be faulted with prejudice against
> tittering and makeup
> in his depiction of Lazaraleen and Susan, but I
> hardly equate tittering
> and makeup with sex.
>I've read the Space trilogy. I've even read that weird Dark Tower
> > Is it a valid criticism of children's fiction? I
> have no idea. Probably
> > not. Do I find it personally creepy, rereading the
> books as an adult?
> > Yes.
> I would encourage you strongly to read some of
> Lewis' adult fiction if
> you're honestly disturbed by this. I don't think
> his views of sexuality
> were perfect, but you could at least find out what
> they are by reading
> his Space Trilogy, and it would give you more
> perspective as you read
> the Narnia books.
I stand by my previous statements: I think the Narnia books are
brilliant. I find the portrayal of active women with sexual signifiers
(if you will) personally ... not offensive, but disappointing.
- In a message dated 7/25/99 10:24:39 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> Somebody wrote:and
> > Perhaps Lewis can be faulted with prejudice against tittering and makeup
> > in his depiction of Lazaraleen and Susan, but I hardly equate tittering
> > makeup with sex.I don't understand what you're saying in the first part. Do you think that
> I dunno. That's where it always seems to begin...
> Somebody wrote:
> > I would encourage you strongly to read some of Lewis' adult fiction if
> > you're honestly disturbed by this. I don't think his views of sexuality
> > were perfect, but you could at least find out what they are by reading
> > his Space Trilogy, and it would give you more perspective as you read
> > the Narnia books.
> I've read the Space trilogy. I've even read that weird Dark Tower fragment.
all sex starts with tittering and makeup? Do you think that Lewis thought
that all sex stated with tittering and makeup? What are you saying?
In the second part, O.K., the Space trilogy is one essential thing to read.
The other essential thing is Lewis's novel _Till We Have Faces_. Ignore _The
Dark Tower_. There's a good chance it isn't even by Lewis.
People, please, please, please do your quoting from people carefully. I had
to write "Somebody wrote" above because I couldn't figure out who Ninzian was
quoting from. When you quote from somebody, always make it clear who you're
quoting from. Don't just use the automatic quote mechanisms. This
eventually produces deep layers of messages and total confusion about who
- Donander Evre [ninzian@...] wrote:
> I stand by my previous statements: I think the Narnia books areWell, we've had both positions put forward -- but all lacking any
> brilliant. I find the portrayal of active women with sexual signifiers
> (if you will) personally ... not offensive, but disappointing.
corroborative evidence. However, the 'Narnia is not sexual' position would
have a hard time putting forth evidence to prove the negative hypothesis, so I
think it's time to put forward the evidence from Narnia that proves that the
characters have sexual signifiers. Otherwsie we have a lot of assertions
without any actual texts to support those assertions. And it is, of course,
the duty of the other side to consider those texts and show how they don't
work in the way asserted.
That is, of course, if folks are willing. We *could* go back to whining about
the new LOTR movie, instead <g>.
(wondering if Jim Carey as Gollum would actually be an improvement at this
Matthew Winslow mwinslow@... http://x-real.firinn.org/
"I want to overhear passionate arguments about what we are and what we are
doing and what we ought to do. I want to feel that art is an utterance made
in good faith by one human being to another. I want to believe there are
geniuses scheming to astonish the rest of us, just for the pleasure of it.
I miss civilization, and I want it back."
Currently reading: The King of Elfland's Daughter by Lord Dunsany