lvbuckeye
Silver Surfer
i'm going to yank my response to Taos' post about Narnia in the "V For Vendetta" thread, and use it as a jumping off point for the mythology discussion that i think is warranted.
wow. i think that my opinion differs from that of the author for a couple rather simple reasons. first off, that book was written some 50 years ago, and i don't think that the 'prosperity' and 'earthly power' message was quite so strong in American churches then. and second, as a matter of pragmatism, considering the fact that Narnia is in essence a children's story, to have Aslan first appear as a lamb, but then return as the Lion, which would be much more in line with the dual nature of Christ; however, would tend to confuse the children for whom the myth was intended.
this film critic seems to forget, somewhere in his diatribe against the religious right in America, that Lewis was writing an ALLEGORY, and a Children's story.
the last paragraph is the kicker in my mind. of course Aslan would be the character that an athiest would most object to, since Aslan is representative of that God who would sacrifice himself in order to save His followers; a concept which is not limited to Christianity, but that pervades many, or even ALL religious myths; from ancient Egypt, through Greek and Roman ideas, and even, or maybe especially, in the Norse mythology, where the gods were not only mortal, they routinely fought and died for their 'children.'
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=alt2 style="BORDER-RIGHT: 1px inset; BORDER-TOP: 1px inset; BORDER-LEFT: 1px inset; BORDER-BOTTOM: 1px inset">
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>of course it would seem Arthurian, look at the context in which it was written. C.S. Lewis went from being an athiest, to a theist, to a Christian based on his love of mythology. it wasn't until Tolkein explained to him that the self sacrifice of Christ was not only myth, but an acutal historical fact that Lewis became a Christian. Lewis had always espoused the notion of the mythology, yet had never looked at Christianity in that context.
i think you mean 'Aslan as Christ,' but anyway,you'd really need to read the rest of the Narnia books to see Aslan as the contextual counterpart of Christ. each book in The Chronicles of Narnia deals with Biblical concepts, whether it be The Magician's Nephew's portrayal of Creation (in which, coincidentally, the world is sung into being, much as in Tolkein's Silmarillion), to the finale of The Last Battle, or even with the concepts of heaven in The Voyage of the Dawn Treador and hell in The Silver Chair.
it is definitely a moral story, and it is definitely worthwhile. Tolkein maintained that since Man was created in God's image, we inherently possess some of His creativity, which is manifested in our mythologies. Tolkein's stance was that each myth was not perfect, since myths are written by men , but that each myth contained ray of light that shown with an element of universal truth. it is about sacrifice, and it is about family, and it is about doing what is right, but it is ALSO about NOT being strong enough to do what is right, and needing some help along the way. if you will allow me to mix the myths for a moment or two, consider Frodo in TLOTR; he took the whole burden of The Ring upon himself, yet when he finally got to Mount Doom, he simply could not go through with it, which i think is quite a wonderful portrayal of the anguish that Christ endured in the Garden of Gethsemene, in which he begged that the cup be taken from him. in that, Christ was very much human, just as Frodo was the least of the people of Middle Earth. i guess that's the fundamental difference between Narnia and TLOTR. Narnia is written allegorically, which Tolkein did not approve of, since the message was SO evident that it turns some people off; while TLOTR was written as pure myth; wonderful, yet ambiguous at first glance, but profoundly Christian upon further review.
okay, have at it.
wow. i think that my opinion differs from that of the author for a couple rather simple reasons. first off, that book was written some 50 years ago, and i don't think that the 'prosperity' and 'earthly power' message was quite so strong in American churches then. and second, as a matter of pragmatism, considering the fact that Narnia is in essence a children's story, to have Aslan first appear as a lamb, but then return as the Lion, which would be much more in line with the dual nature of Christ; however, would tend to confuse the children for whom the myth was intended.
this film critic seems to forget, somewhere in his diatribe against the religious right in America, that Lewis was writing an ALLEGORY, and a Children's story.
the last paragraph is the kicker in my mind. of course Aslan would be the character that an athiest would most object to, since Aslan is representative of that God who would sacrifice himself in order to save His followers; a concept which is not limited to Christianity, but that pervades many, or even ALL religious myths; from ancient Egypt, through Greek and Roman ideas, and even, or maybe especially, in the Norse mythology, where the gods were not only mortal, they routinely fought and died for their 'children.'
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=alt2 style="BORDER-RIGHT: 1px inset; BORDER-TOP: 1px inset; BORDER-LEFT: 1px inset; BORDER-BOTTOM: 1px inset">
Taos said:
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>of course it would seem Arthurian, look at the context in which it was written. C.S. Lewis went from being an athiest, to a theist, to a Christian based on his love of mythology. it wasn't until Tolkein explained to him that the self sacrifice of Christ was not only myth, but an acutal historical fact that Lewis became a Christian. Lewis had always espoused the notion of the mythology, yet had never looked at Christianity in that context.
i think you mean 'Aslan as Christ,' but anyway,you'd really need to read the rest of the Narnia books to see Aslan as the contextual counterpart of Christ. each book in The Chronicles of Narnia deals with Biblical concepts, whether it be The Magician's Nephew's portrayal of Creation (in which, coincidentally, the world is sung into being, much as in Tolkein's Silmarillion), to the finale of The Last Battle, or even with the concepts of heaven in The Voyage of the Dawn Treador and hell in The Silver Chair.
it is definitely a moral story, and it is definitely worthwhile. Tolkein maintained that since Man was created in God's image, we inherently possess some of His creativity, which is manifested in our mythologies. Tolkein's stance was that each myth was not perfect, since myths are written by men , but that each myth contained ray of light that shown with an element of universal truth. it is about sacrifice, and it is about family, and it is about doing what is right, but it is ALSO about NOT being strong enough to do what is right, and needing some help along the way. if you will allow me to mix the myths for a moment or two, consider Frodo in TLOTR; he took the whole burden of The Ring upon himself, yet when he finally got to Mount Doom, he simply could not go through with it, which i think is quite a wonderful portrayal of the anguish that Christ endured in the Garden of Gethsemene, in which he begged that the cup be taken from him. in that, Christ was very much human, just as Frodo was the least of the people of Middle Earth. i guess that's the fundamental difference between Narnia and TLOTR. Narnia is written allegorically, which Tolkein did not approve of, since the message was SO evident that it turns some people off; while TLOTR was written as pure myth; wonderful, yet ambiguous at first glance, but profoundly Christian upon further review.
okay, have at it.
