1. Galadriel says:

    Oh, I wish I could attend. Prayers and thoughts be with you during this.

  2. Fred Warren says:

    Pretty cool. You could publish this as a resource for churches, youth groups, etc.

  3. Galadriel says:

    Agreed. I wish I could do something like this at my church.

  4. That’s the reason I’m posting the notes here — to encourage similar efforts. When this class is done, I’ll hone the results and perhaps have a full-fledge curriculum.

  5. kim says:

    Sticking out my lower lip and pouting.  I wish I could go!!!!  🙁 

  6. […] give discussion questions regarding the first book to the group and discuss them. He has part one here. I’ll post each session as they become available. It looks very interesting and might be a […]

  7. Jill Stengl says:

    This sounds excellent! Wish I could go. I would be very interested in a lesson plan for discussion groups. This series made a huge impact on my life from the first time I read them at age 8, and I love introducing children to the wonders of Narnia. I long ago lost track of how many times I’ve read through the series–usually aloud.

  8. […] you like, catch up on my chapter 1 discussion notes. And if you weren’t able to attend yourself, here are some quick observations. I hope they, along […]

  9. Bainespal says:

    Although I believe I read the entire Chronicles through twice, first when I was about 12 or 13, I don’t think I ever understood them very well.  I’m just now joining in this digital version of the reading group, because I didn’t have a personal copy of the books.  I’ve since ordered and received one, and now I’m grateful and excited to participate. 🙂

    If you have read it before, what were your impressions then?

    I liked it, but I didn’t have many deeper thoughts about it than that.  Of course, I did notice the basic level of Christian meaning that everybody talks about in LWW, but that’s about it.

    By contrast, how and why do you like the book now? How have your experiences (in real life or with other stories) changed your views?

    I’ve become a stickler for worldbuilding in fantasy.  I thought this would make me like the books less coming to them again.  However, these first two chapters seem more timeless and ageless than I thought.  I’ve recently learned that worldbuilding is more than coming up with a lot of names and a timeline full of battles.  Specifically, in Chapter 2, Tumnus’s stories about Narnian life — of the Nymphs and Dryads, of hunting the White Stag and treasure-hunting with the Red Dwarfs, of Silenus and Bacchus — do evoke my sense of myth and wonder.  Lewis does a lot less tweaking of his mythic elements than Tolkien did — Lewis’s Bacchus is essentially the same Greek god from real-world mythology.  As a result, Tolkien’s world feels more real as a sub-creation, but I’m beginning to wonder if Lewis’s world may be genuinely more mythic, containing more of the aura of legend and delight.  The two great Christian authors were different; neither approach is inherently better.

    In your view, what kind of story is this? a) allegory, b) child’s fantasy, c) morality tale, d) memorable reminder of the Gospel? (Answer: all of the above?)


    I would rule out A and probably B.  There’s too many problems trying to interpret the story allegorically, and I believe Lewis said it’s not even directly symbolic.  I’m thinking C is a good answer, since Lewis was so well-versed in moralistic Medieval literature and reproduces the keen sense of wonder that medieval stories must have held.  Also, Lewis’s defense of God in Mere Christianity is strongly based on the evidence for the existence of true Morality.  Of course, for most people, the story is also a reminder of the Gospel.

    Page 4: What do we first hear the children say? What do they say about them? Which child do you like or identify with most? (Note also the animals they mention on page 5.)

    Peter seems sort of careless, but he’s also willing to believe in the fantastic (in so far as his enthusiasm at the prospect of spending a long time in the old house is a sign of that).  Susan is positive and gentle.  She may be patronizing, calling the Professor an “old dear.”  Edmund’s first words show irritation, and the narrative framing indicates that he doesn’t like to show weakness.  Lucy’s first words expresses a desire to follow the rules, at least partially out of a fear of getting in trouble (unless that was just her justification to her siblings for suggesting they all go to bed).
    When they hear a noise, Edmund says it is a “bird,” which he dismisses as insignificant.  But Peter hears a bird and more than a bird — an “owl,” representing wisdom.  In that paragraph of dialog, Peter goes on to mention other fantastic birds, eagles and hawks (and also stags).  Maybe Peter’s fascination with majestic birds represents transcendence, the ability to soar.
    After Peter lists those creatures, Lucy says “Badgers!”, Edmund says “Foxes!”, and Susan says “Rabbits!”  Lucy’s reference to badgers is obviously a premonition to what comes later, but beyond that, I don’t know the connotations that Lewis probably intended for badgers to carry.  I know that foxes are meant to be sly, and that probably says something about Edmund.  I just think of rabbits as fluffly, cute, mostly useless things.

    How do you feel when you go “exploring” with the Pevensie children? Do you remember your own childhood, exploring someplace new, maybe even an old house? How can these enjoyment of that real experience and this story’s experience, glorify God?

    It did make me think of my childhood.  Nothing evokes childhood more strongly than exploration; a sense of newness.  Since the last time I’ve read LWW, I’ve read the first five Harry Potter books, and I’m thinking that Hogwarts must be informed by this old house, based on the colorful, strange, archaic descriptions of the rooms that they pass through.

  10. Greetings, Bainespal,

    This little series has gotten off to a slow start. Only recently, for part 5, did it pick up a little. That was likely because I kept it short. I’m glad to revisit this one with you.

    First, on the broader question of what the Chronicles are, here are two helpful links:

    Simple hermeneutics, I think, a truth I’m still trying to get through my thick head: to learn what an author meant in writing something, ask the author himself, if he is available and wrote on the topic. Fortunately, Lewis himself spoke frequently about how and why he wrote the Chronicles, who Aslan is, and so on. (Of course, this doesn’t preclude bits of truth or myth/story allusions appearing without the author’s conscious consent.)

    Although I believe I read the entire Chronicles through twice, first when I was about 12 or 13, I don’t think I ever understood them very well.

    That’s the beauty of them, isn’t it? So many authors try hard to be brilliant, and you can get all their symbols and secret meanings in one pass (if that). Lewis, schooled as he was in the lost arts of mythology, languages, and archetypes, thought deeper. This is one reason Narnia has so many layers of meaning and keeps devoted fans into adulthood, while other stories were fun only in the past. “Oh, I read that when I was a kid,” some say. (Some say this about Narnia, too. They should read again.)

    I’m just now joining in this digital version of the reading group, because I didn’t have a personal copy of the books.  I’ve since ordered and received one, and now I’m grateful and excited to participate. :)

    I’ll try to follow any of your comments up to part 5 as well! (By the way, part 6 will be delayed this week, because the reading group needed to cancel lats week.)

    I liked it, but I didn’t have many deeper thoughts about it than that.  Of course, I did notice the basic level of Christian meaning that everybody talks about in LWW, but that’s about it.

    In my view, the basic meaning is sufficient, yet as has been so often misquoted from the 2010 suspense/sci-fi film Inception

    I’ve become a stickler for worldbuilding in fantasy.  I thought this would make me like the books less coming to them again.  However, these first two chapters seem more timeless and ageless than I thought.

    Authors such as Michael Ward (Planet Narnia) write how most people have taken after Tolkien, and subtly or consciously adopted Tolkien’s notion that Lewis’s work was simplistic. In reality, they were both aiming for the same goal in different ways: fantasy that taps into mythology and the sense of the transcendent. Ward suggests, and I agree, that we need to respect Lewis more, and not echo Tolkiens’ criticisms.

    As for my own question, here:

    In your view, what kind of story is this? a) allegory, b) child’s fantasy, c) morality tale, d) memorable reminder of the Gospel? (Answer: all of the above?)

    My answer, and the one I gave the group, is e) all of the above.

    If Christians emphasize only one aspect, they’ll miss the really good stuff and the layers the story holds. (They may also overlook the differences between, say, Aslan’s ransom sacrifice for one sinner, and Christ’s substitutionary death for many. But more on that when we get to the chapter about the Stone Table.)

    Peter seems sort of careless, but he’s also willing to believe in the fantastic (in so far as his enthusiasm at the prospect of spending a long time in the old house is a sign of that).  Susan is positive and gentle. […]

    Things that I never thought about when I read this for the first time. This is true story efficiency. In one line of dialogue, we know something about the characters (which some, including the 2005 film screenwriters, have incorrectly called underdeveloped). Yes, authors can learn from this, yet readers should be delighted.

    When they hear a noise, Edmund says it is a “bird,” which he dismisses as insignificant.  But Peter hears a bird and more than a bird — an “owl,” representing wisdom.

    I’d never thought of that! And of course, Peter not only demonstrates wisdom by knowing about nature — to borrow a line from Dawn Treader, he’s read “the right sorts of books” — but is associated with the mythological symbol of wisdom.

    Recently I’ve appreciated Peter more as the best example of how an adult should respect and engage with a fantasy world: with maturity, yet joy and adventure.

    In that paragraph of dialog, Peter goes on to mention other fantastic birds, eagles and hawks (and also stags).  Maybe Peter’s fascination with majestic birds represents transcendence, the ability to soar.

    Again I haven’t thought of that. Lewis sneaks it in: another reflection of Peter’s sense of adventure and exploration. It’s more explicit later, when he is not at all deterred by bad weather and uses it as a chance to explore the old house. But here we get a taste of it, to the point where we’re not surprised by Peter’s exploration later. He also is most willing to accept Narnia’s existence once it’s proven, without even a hint of the stubbornness marking Edmund, who want to “grow up” wrongly.

    After Peter lists those creatures, Lucy says “Badgers!”, Edmund says “Foxes!”, and Susan says “Rabbits!”  Lucy’s reference to badgers is obviously a premonition to what comes later, but beyond that, I don’t know the connotations that Lewis probably intended for badgers to carry.

    In Narnia, badgers represent faithfulness. I believe this is a mythological tie-in.

    I know that foxes are meant to be sly, and that probably says something about Edmund. 

    In the U.S. version, that was changed to “snakes.” Makes it more overt. I prefer “foxes,” which has a deeper meaning even for those familiar with fairy tales.

    It did make me think of my childhood.  Nothing evokes childhood more strongly than exploration; a sense of newness.  Since the last time I’ve read LWW, I’ve read the first five Harry Potter books, and I’m thinking that Hogwarts must be informed by this old house, based on the colorful, strange, archaic descriptions of the rooms that they pass through.

    Rowling has admitted inspiration from Narnia, even down to a certain character being named Cedric … Diggory (yet with two Gs instead of one).

    More to come, I’m sure!

    • Bainespal says:

      Thank you.  I couldn’t pass up an opportunity to mine the depths of a classic fantasy written by such an awesome and beloved author.

      First, on the broader question of what the Chronicles are, here are two helpful links:

      Narnia helps us live better here — Desiring God

      Sometimes Fairy Stories May Say Best What’s To Be Said — C.S. Lewis

      Those are great articles.  I’ve actually seen Lewis’s article once before.  So, the Christianity in The Chronicles of Narnia is “organic” in that it was an intrinsic and inseparable part of the creative revelation that provided the raw material of the work, but Lewis did also make intentional use of that Christian material.
      I have a thought about something in Chapter 2, so I’ll probably post that in the next column. 😉

What do you think?