So... Original or Chronological?
PostPosted: Wed May 18, 2005 11:28 pm
Are you an original order fan of Chronicles of Narnia (LWW first and MN 6th) or a chronological order fan (MN first and LWW second)?
I am an original order fan. I think that is the way they should be written to preserve the mystery and newness of it all. The way that MN lays everything out for you takes away from some of the "strangeness" of LWW if you read it afterwards because by that point you're allready used to it...
I've been on IMDB gathering arguments that others had made and here are a few I find to be entirely coherent:
That is basically a more eloquent version of what I have said all along, but I found this to be on target too, which is a comparison that I should have thought of but didn't:
When "Empire" came out, the identity of Luke's father was considered one of the best twists in any movie up to that point... It set the stage for future movies, and anyone experiencing the series for the first time should be allowed that chance as well, i believe. The same thing goes for CoN... I think readers should be allowed the chance, the first time through, to be in a strange world you don't know about when all his happens rather than having it all explained to you.
Drdsr, quoting Lewis, said "Of a book's meaning...its author is not necessarily the best, and is never a perfect judge..." I doubt this quote was referring to the order of the books, but it definately applies... Reading MN first changes something about the books. It changes the atmosphere. It would be an entirely different experience... You can always get the "complete view" by reading the books in Chronological order, but you can never again recapture the mystery you can get only by reading the books in order of publishing.
This also jumped out at me
Sorry for not having much of my own to say, but other people (who are likely much bigger fans than I am) said it so much better than I have been able to. But, what do you all think?
I am an original order fan. I think that is the way they should be written to preserve the mystery and newness of it all. The way that MN lays everything out for you takes away from some of the "strangeness" of LWW if you read it afterwards because by that point you're allready used to it...
I've been on IMDB gathering arguments that others had made and here are a few I find to be entirely coherent:
Drdsr quoting Peter J. Schakel wrote:"Several artistic effects in The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe are undercut when one of the other books is read before it. The careful use of details to enable readers to share Lucy's initial experience in Narnia and the equally careful buildup before Aslan's name is mentioned work best and have their fullest impact if this book is one's introduction to Narnia."
"The introduction to the lion is not at all the same, artistically or emotionally, in The Magician's Nephew: it assumes, on the contrary, that readers do have prior knowledge of him. When the voice first begins to sing in chapter 8, Lewis emphasizes the beauty, not the mysteriousness, of it. And when the sun rises and the singer becomes visible, the story says simply, "It was a Lion. Huge, shaggy, and bright it stood facing the risen sun" (ch. 8). There is no buildup like "Don't you know who is the King of Beasts? Aslan is a lion--the Lion, the great Lion" and no introduction to him as "the son of the great Emperor-Beyond-the-Sea" as there is in The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe (ch. 8). There are no characters in The Magician's Nephew who could have such knowledge of him (Lewis never does bother to identify him until the animals, as soon as they are given the gift of speech, say his name somehow they just know it, without being told). Readers who have already read The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe enjoy the pleasure of understanding something the characters in the story do not know. Artistically and emotionally, then, The Magician's Nephew fits in better as a flashback, filling in the background of places and people already known, than as a first book introducing those places and people."
That is basically a more eloquent version of what I have said all along, but I found this to be on target too, which is a comparison that I should have thought of but didn't:
Liberalami wrote:Put it this way: if one were to watch both Star Wars trilogies for the first time, you wouldn't start with the more recent prequel trilogy, even though it's the story that takes place first chronologically. If you did, the revelation at the end of The Empire Strikes Back wouldn't be shocking at all, as you would already know who Luke's father is, if you'd watched the prequel trilogy first.
When "Empire" came out, the identity of Luke's father was considered one of the best twists in any movie up to that point... It set the stage for future movies, and anyone experiencing the series for the first time should be allowed that chance as well, i believe. The same thing goes for CoN... I think readers should be allowed the chance, the first time through, to be in a strange world you don't know about when all his happens rather than having it all explained to you.
Drdsr, quoting Lewis, said "Of a book's meaning...its author is not necessarily the best, and is never a perfect judge..." I doubt this quote was referring to the order of the books, but it definately applies... Reading MN first changes something about the books. It changes the atmosphere. It would be an entirely different experience... You can always get the "complete view" by reading the books in Chronological order, but you can never again recapture the mystery you can get only by reading the books in order of publishing.
bladair wrote:One view that no one ever seems to take on the matter is the relationship between TMN and TLB. TMN deals with the creation of worlds (Narnia) and the destruction of worlds (Charn). If one reads TMN or sees it as a movie, first, the possibility that Narnia will come to an end is always in their mind. If we save TMN for book (or movie) 6, then it is a perfect prelude to TLB. Once again, we see that publishing order just makes sense.
This also jumped out at me
drsdr wrote:Has anyone considered that a truly chronological reading of the series would require one to read The Magician's Nephew first, then read The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe until halfway through the last chapter--then stop midway through the last chapter, read The Horse and His Boy, and THEN finish LWW? Just a silly thought..
Sorry for not having much of my own to say, but other people (who are likely much bigger fans than I am) said it so much better than I have been able to. But, what do you all think?