Narnia

[achilleus]

but it's impossible to grow up as a woman in our society without falling into that?

I don't quite understand, are you asking if it's impossible?

I'm sure you've heard of the feminists who decry lipstick in general? I saw this great modern art piece that was a mini brick house, and the bricks were lipstick. Thus playing on the argument that lipstick serves no practical, useful purpose but to put women in their place in society...

*shrug* .... she argued it much better than i.

I don't doubt that. Since it was a paper, I'm sure she researched it, and used specific passages to back up her point. I'm not disagreeing wholeheartedly, just commenting on the fact that the reader interprets so much...

i think Tolkein specifically rejected the idea it was written as a metaphor for WWII. i don't remember where i read that, but i vaguely remember it......

Actually, he rejected all the theories. I could bore you with details, but basically, he was a devout professor, and created Middle Earth as a history for a language he created.

Anywho...

[secretly]

. . . the hobbits and Gandalf being addicted to weed . . .

QFE

[MyrddinsPrecint]

Actually, he rejected all the theories. I could bore you with details, but basically, he was a devout professor, and created Middle Earth as a history for a language he created.

my senior year of high school i was supposed to do a project.... then my teacher got sick, and we all got As.

but defending that was supposed to be what i was defending. a bunch of my other friends were defending other theories. none of us reallly cared which was accurate....

but i had trouble finding info.

granted, the projects got canceled before i did much research at all...... but the other theories seem to be more fun!

[Epee_Pox]

http://www.youtube.com/watch.php?v=zLElfJ9YCh0

[Monkeyboy]

I guess I'm not as smart as you Lit types. I saw the movie with a 7 and 13 yr old daughter, and we all had a great time, ate a lot of popcorn and enjoyed the show.

Everything can be seen in at least 2 ways...was the half-goat (Mr. Tumnus?) Lucy's friend or a child molester? He did get her back to his house and then put her to sleep..did anything happen while she was out?

Mind you, I say this as the protective father of 2 beautiful blond daughters, just to prove a point. You can read too much into anything.

BTW I like any movie where the leading ladies arn't whimpering bits of fluff. In LoTR, I truly enjoyed the part where the warrior chick drops the big bad undead Knight who "cannot be killed by any man" right after showing him the error in his protection.

[achilleus]

I guess I'm not as smart as you Lit types. I saw the movie with a 7 and 13 yr old daughter, and we all had a great time, ate a lot of popcorn and enjoyed the show.

Everything can be seen in at least 2 ways...was the half-goat (Mr. Tumnus?) Lucy's friend or a child molester? He did get her back to his house and then put her to sleep..did anything happen while she was out?

Mind you, I say this as the protective father of 2 beautiful blond daughters, just to prove a point. You can read too much into anything.

BTW I like any movie where the leading ladies arn't whimpering bits of fluff. In LoTR, I truly enjoyed the part where the warrior chick drops the big bad undead Knight who "cannot be killed by any man" right after showing him the error in his protection.

Sounds like you had the right idea. You went to a fairy tale and were entertained.

And the part with Eowyn in LoTR was always my fav, even in my youth. But really is that your criteria for liking a movie? I mean, did you see Tomb Raider? Elektra? Daredevil?

Those movies sucked. I could go on, but I think you get the idea.

[KD5MDK]

As for a Narnian Christmas, did you miss out that C.S. Lewis was religious and that Aslan is god?

Oh, and I know that it's easy for people to make obvious comparisons to LoTR, but I don't get 'em. At all. I mean, one's a fairy tale and the other is a complex, dense, adult story. Sure they both involve fantastical elements and swords, but that's about it. It's like comparing a Cheech and Chong flick to Scarface since they both have drug related themes..

I get that he was religious. I've read The Screwtape Letters and am working on The Abolition of Man, and intend to read Mere Christianity someday. I'm just saying that it makes No sense for their to be a holiday celebrating the birth of someone who not only never existed in Narnia, but they had no reason to imagine ever existed, or even heard of. Certainly the sort of thing most children would overlook, but I mean, the position of Christ is even already taken by JesusCat (I'm sorry, I saw a funny review that kept using that phrase).

As for the Lord of the Rings comparison, mine is entirely not about story, themes, etc. It was about the camera shots, etc that were used in both movies. Narnia felt very much as if it were a different story being told the same way (same views, images, different people/animals). Not at all the feeling one gets from the books.

Actually, he rejected all the theories. I could bore you with details, but basically, he was a devout professor, and created Middle Earth as a history for a language he created.

Well, this is the sort of time when I think it is possible to say that sometimes writers don't know everything about their own works. Certainly it wasn't based on WW2: The chronology doesn't work, in that the books were well along before it. I can't imagine he suddenly went back and rewrote it all to include this magic ring when the A-bomb became public knowledge in 1945.
Likewise, I will bow to his personal objections to allegory and say I do not believe it was intended to send a message consciously. However, the clear "fallen" nature of the world, things never reaching the glory of their past, the blight of industrialism (Ted Sandyman's mill in Hobbiton, for example) are all indications of his view of the world, which I think was greatly shaped both by the pollution and ill effects of the Industrial Revolution, and his personal experiences in WWI. He fought in the bloody Battle of the Somme, and there's no way a man could go through that and be unchanged.

I'll agree with (to jump back to Narnia) that Susan was lost because she lost faith, not because of the sin of lipstick.

[MyrddinsPrecint]

maybe Aslan told them about Jesus...............


maybe Christmas was Aslan's birthday!!!

do they ever reference Jesus?


and, besides, Christmas celebrations existed long before Jesus, it was just called something different:

http://www.****christmas.org/

[achilleus]

I get that he was religious. I've read The Screwtape Letters and am working on The Abolition of Man, and intend to read Mere Christianity someday. I'm just saying that it makes No sense for their to be a holiday celebrating the birth of someone who not only never existed in Narnia, but they had no reason to imagine ever existed, or even heard of. Certainly the sort of thing most children would overlook, but I mean, the position of Christ is even already taken by JesusCat (I'm sorry, I saw a funny review that kept using that phrase).

See MP's post above.
And JesusCat is a pretty good nickname.

As for the Lord of the Rings comparison, mine is entirely not about story, themes, etc. It was about the camera shots, etc that were used in both movies. Narnia felt very much as if it were a different story being told the same way (same views, images, different people/animals). Not at all the feeling one gets from the books.

Hm...

Camera shots, maybe, I didn't notice, and I didn't get the feeling that it was being told the same way. I got a very similar impression from the books. A light, fairy tale meant for kids...

Ah well...

Well, this is the sort of time when I think it is possible to say that sometimes writers don't know everything about their own works. Certainly it wasn't based on WW2: The chronology doesn't work, in that the books were well along before it. I can't imagine he suddenly went back and rewrote it all to include this magic ring when the A-bomb became public knowledge in 1945.
Likewise, I will bow to his personal objections to allegory and say I do not believe it was intended to send a message consciously. However, the clear "fallen" nature of the world, things never reaching the glory of their past, the blight of industrialism (Ted Sandyman's mill in Hobbiton, for example) are all indications of his view of the world, which I think was greatly shaped both by the pollution and ill effects of the Industrial Revolution, and his personal experiences in WWI. He fought in the bloody Battle of the Somme, and there's no way a man could go through that and be unchanged.

You ever see that movie 'Back to School' with Rodney Dangerfield? He hires Kurt Vonnegut to write a report for him on a Vonnegut book, and Dangerfield receives an F. The professor gives the F because they realize that it's not his work, but adds 'And the person who wrote it doesn't know a thing about Vonnegut!' Which leads to an even better scene of Dangerfield cussing out Vonnegut.

Or I remember this one instance, where an author who writes pulp stories was questioned by a fan. The fan was happy that in his newest book, the author was taking a stand against domestic violence. To which the author replied, 'I'm not making any statements or stands. The character in my book was a slob who liked to beat up women, and if you got that and were entertained by my book, then you got my point.'

Yes, it's obvious that through stories we can catch glimpses of the author's personal views of the world, just as we can catch glimpses of the reader's world view as the expound on what they 'got' from a book or movie.

But, just because we get these glimpses into the author's world view, this doesn't mean everything has a hidden message, or that Frodo and Sam are lovers.

I mean, sometimes, a cigar is just a cigar.

I'll agree with (to jump back to Narnia) that Susan was lost because she lost faith, not because of the sin of lipstick.

It's what I remember from reading the book when I 8. Or was it 9? Anyway, I'm sure if I reread the other books now, I'd have a different take. I mean, when I first read them, I didn't pick up on Aslan being JesusCat. I had to have it explained to me. When I picked up LWW a couple of years ago, I thought it was so obvious....

[MyrddinsPrecint]

You ever see that movie 'Back to School' with Rodney Dangerfield? He hires Kurt Vonnegut to write a report for him on a Vonnegut book, and Dangerfield receives an F. The professor gives the F because they realize that it's not his work, but adds 'And the person who wrote it doesn't know a thing about Vonnegut!' Which leads to an even better scene of Dangerfield cussing out Vonnegut.

one of my profs from last semester had a favorite story:

She was walking downtown one day with a friend. Northampton, as those who have been here know, always has a few homeless people hanging about. They walk past a guy sitting on a bench, and after they pass, the visitor asks my prof "doesn't northampton take care of its homeless?"

my prof's reply was "oh, don't worry about him. that was just kurt vonnegut."


oh, that prof was very into name dropping.............

[prototoast]

oh, that prof was very into name dropping.............

Who in northampton doesn't have a kurt vonnegut story?

[JackOfHearts]

I mean, did you see Tomb Raider? Elektra? Daredevil?

Those movies sucked. I could go on, but I think you get the idea.

Personally, I enjoyed DareDevil. It may not have been oscar worthy, but it was a decent enough flick. On what criteria do you claim suckiness?

[achilleus]

Personally, I enjoyed DareDevil. It may not have been oscar worthy, but it was a decent enough flick. On what criteria do you claim suckiness?

Because it was bad. I mean real bad.

First off everytime Colin Farell showed himself it was laughable, and his character wasn't meant to be all that laughable.

I also had trouble telling if it was really Ben Affleck, or just a life sized cardboard cut-out at times. Jennifer Garner and Jon Favreau were the only bright spots of the film, and the fight sequences and special effects were so...ad hoc.
Course, the reason for that was studio dumping a lot of money late, into a project that was never intended to be a big budget film.

And the dialogue was so forgettable. I mean, the Daredevil comics, specifically the Frank Miller one's (who created Electra and whose stories served as the basis for the movie...did you spot his cameo?) had memorable lines you'd think they would have used some of them...

It was interesting to me that they used some of the same angles and shots that Frank Miller uses in his artwork of the Daredevil comics. The problem? These same shots and angles were used, to much better effect in the Matrix (which was influenced greatly by Miller's work). The result? A very bad film with the feeling of trying to be something it's not.

[achilleus]

You know a friend who read the books pointed out something rather obvious about a Narnian Christmas.

The denizens of Narnia refer to humans as 'Son's of Adam' or 'Daughter's of Eve', so it seems that Christian mythology is known in Narnia, thus the possiblity exists that Narnians have heard of Jesus and celebrate Christmas...

[KD5MDK]

As I recall, the references to Sons of Adam and Daughters of Eve were in relation to a prophetcy, and so needn't have made any sense at all. Certainly most prophetcies don't.

[MyrddinsPrecint]

I have this suspicion that the rereading the magician's nephew will help me here.... i'll do that later tonight....


(or when i've finished my christmas shopping. i haven't starte yet)