Perhaps you have read Polly Toynbee's passionate article on the new Narnia film. Well worth a read. It is not one of her more measured responses, and all the more interesting for that.
Every one of those thorns, the nuns used to tell my mother, is hammered into Jesus's holy head every day that you don't eat your greens or say your prayers.The article gives some real insight into Polly Toynbee's real issues with abusive religion, which we want to be hugely sympathetic to.
The two dons may have shared the same love of unquestioning feudal power, with worlds of obedient plebs and inferior folk eager to bend at the knee to any passing superior white persons - even children; both their fantasy worlds and their Christianity assumes that rigid hierarchy of power - lord of lords, king of kings, prince of peace to be worshipped and adored.But essentially this is a power struggle between conservatism and liberalism, and christianity is caught up in it. I don't think we want the agenda of Jesus associated with that power struggle, and in order to do that any conversation will have to be humble about the failings of the church in the past and its throwing its substantial weigh behind political and social conservatism. However the crucial issue is this:
So Lewis weaves his dreams to invade children's minds with Christian iconography that is part fairytale wonder and joy - but heavily laden with guilt, blame, sacrifice and a suffering that is dark with emotional sadism.Interwoven with that struggle however is a philosophical debate. Scientific humanism will allow no limits to be placed on human power and potential. Here we need to disagree. Pollys humanism is her weakness - her privilege and education, social standing and personal stature make her naive about the reality of human experience. We are guilty, we do suffer - the answer is not education (though that is a profound good) we do need redemption - but trying to help Polly to see that is a massive task, particularly given her experiences.
4 comments:
Stuart pointed out this article too.
'The strategy for marketing the movie The Chronicles of Narnia resembles nothing so much as the strategy used to re-elect George W. Bush as president in 2004: Pursue mainstream voters with adverts that stress martial valor and family values, and target Christian evangelicals with overtly religious appeals church by church, radio station by radio station.'
I think that it is well worth recognising that the Christian market in the US is a hugely rich one and Disney are making financial decisions in marketing it to Christians.
thing that got me musing from polly's article is the issue of strength and weakness. i have to admit i always thought it kind of ruined most of the narnia stories that basically everything always got really bad and then aslan turns up and is essentially invincible- just a roar, a leap, a show of teeth and the battle's over.
but if aslan is the christ then omnipotence is a hard enemy to fight- except when he surrenders his life.
why wasn't aslan a lamb? I have heard that clive staples (CS) chose the name aslan from that bit in revelation 5 where John sees 'a lion looking as a lamb slain'. Alsan is an assonant rendering of 'as lamb'. So we have 'the Lion as Lamb'. And on the stone table that's what happens- he is shawn and becomes the lamb. It is interesting to note that John saw it that way round rather than the lamb looking like a lion, particularly as Jesus is referred to as the Lamb almost all the way through the rest of the book (waiting for the New Zealand epic of revelaion to come out one Christmas?? :) )
Anyhoo. Back to weakness and strength. I agree with Polly's points about Republican muscular Christianity that seems to leave a bad taste in the mouth. Hmmm. Maybe the lamb has a stronger message for this culture.
Yet Aslan is tender and playful- (although the girls feel that playing with the resurrected Alsan is like playing with a lightning storm if i remember right). He is def loving. I think he helps us regain 'the friendship and the fear' appropriate which is hard for us to hold onto.
Although Tolkien and Lewis both express their hierarchies, their choice of hobbits and children surely also reflects a commitment to the small and weak- 'the things that are not to shame the wise'...
Which makes me also ask why is it that children ubiquitously love narnia and aslan but the scholarly likes of Pulman and Toynbee are wretching... stumbling... ??
Sammy C
I like the juxtaposition of the post on Narnia and image of the lion Aslan with the post on love and the image of the bound lamb......
If we take love out of the equation then I think Polly would be right.
Super color scheme, I like it! Good job. Go on.
»
Post a Comment