Are You a Daughter of Eve?

Why, Daughter of Eve, that's what I brought you here for.
I'm to lead you where you shall meet him...

The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe

The creatures of Narnia look at their foreign visitors and ask what to the creatures is the most important of questions, "Are you a daughter of Eve?" It is the first question Tumnus asks Lucy, it is the musing of Trumpkin when presented with Eustace and Jill, it is moniker Mr. Beaver gives to Susan in the above quote. And perhaps what is most confusing, the children do not realize what it means.  

Well, what does it mean? 

On its surface the question of Tumnus is simply one of species identification. Are you really that species descended from Adam and Eve who I supposed to be looking out for. Perhaps instead you are a small giant or one of the jinn? Lucy, unsure why anyone would confuse a human for anything else, is understandably not able to process the question. 

But, as we see with Tumnus, there is more to the question, though perhaps at this point himself does not realize. Are you a Daughter of Eve? A descendant of the woman who, on the one hand, brought sin to the world, but is yet, "Little less than divine. (Psalms 8:5)" Are you of the kind that tore creation asunder, but is still a creator yourself, "the mother of all life (Genesis 3:20)"? Do you understand that coming from the Lord Adam and the Lady Eve, "That is both honor enough to erect the head of the poorest beggar, and shame enough to bow the shoulders of the greatest emperor on earth."

For only when you do, can you face the one God, the Divine Presence, the Creator of All.

Aslan brings the children to Narnia to get to know him, but to do that they first need to know themselves and where they come from.   

The Song of Spring

The coming of Spring is an essential element in The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe. Its arrival indicates the coming of Aslan into Narnia and the breaking of the White Witch's power manifest by the unending Winter.  Spring thus indicates the coming of God, defeat of evil, and redemption of God's chosen. No doubt Lewis' model for this is the bible itself in which the Children of Israel are redeemed from Egypt in the month of Spring (Exodus 23:15 and Exodus 34:18). 

Interestingly, Passover, the Spring Festival, is graced by the reading of Song of Songs. Superficially, this may be because the context of that work which, beyond its ample use of metaphorical flora and fauna, is Springtime (Song of Songs 7:13), "Let us go early to the vineyards, let us see if the vine has flowered, if its blossoms have opened, if the pomegranates are in bloom." More so, Spring is an appropriate context for the budding relationship between the beloved (guy) and darling (girl), representing God and Israel, is Song of Songs. That relationship blossomed with Israel's exodus from Egypt. The verse, (Song of Songs 1:9), "I have likened you, my darling, to a mare in Pharaoh’s chariots," hints to said exodus, and the midrashic literature then likens ups and downs of the relationship described in Song of Songs to the events surrounding the Exodus. 

The Narnian creation story is thus at odds with the biblical saga. In Narnia, Aslan creates the world through song, but does not appear to sing again. In the bible God creates the world via speech, and the song, or the Song of Songs, is initiated and employed when a relationship is formed between God and His chosen people. 

I think this is worth some contemplation. The evolution from creation to God's people, capable of bringing His presence down to earth, is the process that goes from prose to poetry. What is the difference between prose and poetry? Well, prose is much more free form and mirrors the way we talk colloquially. We use prose to convey information, stories, or ideas and when we want to do so precisely. 

Poetry, is much more constricted as it requires rhythm and perhaps rhyme. However, that constriction demonstrates that there is more to the words than meets the eye. There is an emotion, a tune, that the words alone are unable to convey. Thus, poetry and song are used for joy and sadness, to communicate love and convey emotion. 

God creates the world with speech, the placement of the spheres, the growing of the trees, the exactness of the sciences. Love, however, requires a response. It must be humanity that will grow from just another facet of mundane earth into beings capable of relating to and loving God. When that has been fulfilled, when humanity recognizes God, not only as Creator, but as the engine of history and as Being with whom to form a relationship, then, and only then, can there be song. This threshold was reached at the time of the Exodus and its subsequent events through the giving of the Torah at Sinai. 

Thus, on Passover, the time of freedom, at the beginning of Spring, we read the poetry of Song of Songs. On the one hand this commemorates the miracles of the past and relationship between God and Israel that first produced song.  On the other, reading the Song of Songs demonstrates our commitment to and desire for a continued relationship with God. The relationship is ongoing, God is still singing, and so are we. 

On Moses' Savior and Aslan's Actor

Several years ago, I watched the first Harry Potter movie with my son...

I complained about it for a week: it wasn't true to the book, the drama was underplayed, some of the scenes were just horribly wrong... 

So, as you can imagine, when some time later I metioned to my wife that perhaps I should watch "The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe," just to see how it was done, my wife absolutely forbade it. After all, if it took a week of complaining about Harry Potter, can you imagine how long I would complain about "The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe"?

She was right, of course, and to this day, I have never seen those movies. 

So, when the news came out that Netflix was going to take its turn in transforming the Chronicles into movies, I didn't think much of it - I wasn't going to watch them anyway. But there's lots of news about these movies and some of the latest news got me thinking as to what would make a good movie.

In truth, there is a book much more important than any of the Chronicles, parts of which have been turned into movies several times. Of course, I refer to the bible itself. And it happens that, despite some disregard to the biblical narrative, I really loved The Prince of Egypt. The reason, I think, is that mostly the changes were superficial, Moses being lifted from the water by Pharoah's wife instead of daughter. The whole part of Tzipporah in Egypt and being offered as a wife to Ramses. I'm not quite sure why those changes were made, but it did not at all appear to be an attack on the source material, the bible. 

In fact, in some ways, making a movie of the bible is easier than making a movie about a book. Biblical stories are generally short, lacking explicit detail, and even internal emotion of the characters. Prince of Egypt capitalizes on this in portraying the evolving relationship between Moses and Ramses, inventing how Moses learned he was a Hebrew, and giving some time to Moses long stint in Midian. And of course, the bible is not a musical so Disney could add all sorts of songs without compromising the story.

Nonetheless, adding in these details can cause harm should they counter the main themes of the particular biblical story, somehow unmoor the story from the rest of biblical history, or undermine the biblical view of ethics and morality. For example, a vindictive Moses showing scorn to Pharoah as the Egyptian economy is deciamated, an authoritarian Moses chastising the Hebrews who question whether he in an emissary of God, a triumphalist Moses ridiculing Ramses as he is thrashing in the sea could have been inserted into the movie without violence to the biblical story. But doing so would have sharply violated Judeo-Christian ethics and morals and thus undermined the movie. I don't think the movie did that. Quite the opposite I think the details enhanced ethical and moral lessons of the story. But, there still is a lot of leeway in filling in those details. 

The Narnian stories are much more detailed than the biblical ones. That means there's a lot more material that, if changed, can be regarded as blasphemous in the eyes of the viewers. Of course, one can raise questions as to what is important in the stories themselves. For example, Lucy is clearly described as "golden-haired" in The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe. Yet, I didn't hear any complaints that her hair was brown in the most recent movie. Now, in truth I might say Lucy's golden hair is not coincidental, but that it reflects Lucy's servitude to Aslan whose mane, fur, back, and even voice are described as golden throughout the Chronicles.   

Now, I'm not trying to make the color of Lucy's hair a complaint. I am simply noting that with more details come more potential changes from book to movie, and therefore more room for people to criticize changes in what they regard as integral to the books. 

So, the first step of a director transforming a book into a movie is to identify what is fundamental and what is not. What is important in the Chronicles of Narnia? 

As with the biblical stories, this question must resonate on a number of levels. There is the integrity of the story in front of us, the newest one being The Magician's Nephew, how that particular story fits in with the other Chronicles (and, being a prequel, this is most important), and a fidelity to the morals and and ethics of the story's source. And here, in this last level, is where most of the drama in the directing of the movie will take place. 

One can, in fact, forget the Christian allegory of the Chronicles. One need not be a Christian, or even a theist, to enjoy the stories. But it is difficult to imagine that one who does not have a basic working knowledge of Christianity and at least respects the values it represents can fully appreciate the stories for what they are. Thus, ignoring the Christianity of the Chronicles will fundamentally undermine the stories, making them less faithful to their original, less important to their audience, and, at the end, less enjoyable as a story. 

On Revealing and Unrevealing Disguises (Part 2)

In our last posts we've been discussing different types of disguises: those that attempt to hide one's true self and those that reveal it. We saw how various Narnian heroes attempted to disguise themselves into things they were not and were either stopped from doing so, or the disguise utterly failed. Tumnus, however, unknowingly disguised himself as one who was going Christmas shopping. And because this revealed his true nature as one hoping for Aslan's redemption, he succeeded in playing a role in that redemption.

The reason for this is that any true hero, and any true redemption, cannot come without one's true self. There is no hiding! Queen Esther had to reveal that she was a Jewess to bring about redemption, she could no longer hide. So too, Peter and the Pevensies and Shasta and Aravis, could not hide as slaves or merchants to achieve their personal redemption. They had to be themselves.

In the Last Battle both villains and heroes attempt to disguise themselves. First, and most importantly, Puzzle is convinced to disguise himself as Aslan. In this, Puzzle made no attempt at redemption or anything else. There was no plan, no goal, and certainly no redemption in Puzzle's mind. Quite the opposite, there was an anti-redemption, a false redemption in which Shift perceived the "redemption" of Narnia in the Calormen Empire and not in Aslan. And, indeed, it worked. A false redemption can occur, in fact it must occur, via lies and untruths. 

Furthermore, a false redemption must be totally false. Shift attempts to disguise himself as a man and a king by putting on Tirian's crown. And, in a sense, he succeeds. The Narnaians call him a man and worship him. It is only we, looking from the worldview of true redemption, and the Calormens who are making no attempt at redemption who are not fooled by Shift's disguises. 

Finally, we have our heroes, Tirian, Jill, and Eustace, once again dressing up not as their true selves, but as Calormens. And while they have some temporary success, their ultimate failure is never in doubt. In fact, it is as Calormens that they see that Tash himself has invaded Narnia. Eventually, they remove theri disguise, for the fight cannot be won as someone else.

Those who truly seek redemption can never be ashamed of their hopes and dreams. Though tempting, such disguises cannot work. The disguises one should wear are those that further the redemptive cause, to act as heroes of the cause even if we are not, and to dress up, to be, great warriors of God even if we don't recognize it when we look in the mirror. 

God chooses the method of redemption, not us. 

Our job is to keep His banner raised high. 

Revealing and Unrevealing Disguises (Purim)

Tonight is the night of Purim, and we've just read the Book of Esther in the synagogue. It's interesting to contrast the two Queens of the book and the disguises they wear or not. The first is Queen Vashti, the first wife of King Ahasuerus. The King demands that she present herself before the officers of the Land with her royal crown. She refuses - she does not take her position and its responsibilities seriously. She really is a Queen but because she refuses to reveal it, she is sentenced to death. 

In contrast, Queen Esther does not see herself as anyone particularly special. She at first refuses to go announced before the king. Mordechai tells her what her role actually is, and that even if she does not see it, everyone in the castle and Land looks at her with favor. She puts on her royal clothes, enters before the king, and sparks redemption.  

On Revealing and Unrevealing Disguises (Part 1)

Our sages tell us that you can learn of someone's true nature if you observe them in three contexts: their wallet (their business dealings), when they are angry, and when they drink. On Purim, which for non-Jerusalmites falls out on Friday (March 14), two of these factors come into play: money, where there is an extra emphasis and command to give money to the poor, and wine, which is traditionally drunk due to the centrailty of wine in the commemorated story of Queen Esther. 

In place of anger, however, I have often suggested that the Jewish people have developed another method of demonstrating their true nature, which is the custom of dressing up. How this custom arose is not the goal of this post, but I nonetheless think that how someone dresses up may provide insight into their nature. I think people inherently realize this when in English they will colloquially say, "I am going to be ______ for Purim?" And of course, that's silly. People are who they are and do not become a princess, Batman, or Aaron Judge on Purim. But perhaps there's more than just a shortening of language in this formulation, when someone says they "want to be," rather than saying they "want to dress up as." Because, to some degree, the person really would like to be Queen Esther, a soldier, or a fireman - why else would they want to dress up as that person or object?

This is true dressing up - in fact we might say it's a revealing disguise, because while the disguise may make someone look like someone or something else, in fact, it reveals an aspect of who they really are. 

Before tying this into Narnia, I'll just note that personally I do not dress up (or drink) on Purim because I am perfectly happy being myself (not that there isn't much to criticize in that). However, this year, I will wear my math tie in honor of Pi Day.   

Anyway... on to Narnia...

There is quite a bit of dressing up in Narnia and I think what we'll see is that there are good ways and bad ways to dress up. When Lucy first enters Narnia she meets the faun Tumnus who is unknowingly dressed up look "just as if he had been doing his Christmas shopping." Of course, as we've discussed elsewhere, if there was one thing Tumnus was NOT doing it was Christmas shopping. But Tumnus, perhaps still unconsciously, yearned for the time that he would be able to, and I have no doubt that less than 12 months later he was in fact Christmas shopping. This "disguise" was revealing. It showed us the true nature of Tumnus' soul - he was yearning for redemption. He knew there would be redemption, and he disguised himself to reveal the coming of redemption. 

Next, when the Pevensie children enter Narnia for the first time together they don fur coats leading Lucy to exclaim, "We can pretend we are Arctic explorers," and she's in some senses correct, but it is an unrevealing disguise. It does not truly demonstrate who they are or what they want. Peter responds correctly, "This is going to be exciting enough without pretending." This adventure cannot be pretend, it must be them, themselves, not disguised as somone else. 

The same thing happens shortly afterwards. Peter suggests thinking of a stratagem to save Tumnus from the White Witch. He says, "I mean couldn't we dress up as something, or pretend to be - oh, pedlars or anything." These are unrevealing disguises. Peter has desire to be a pedlar. And here, Mr Beaver has the proper reply. No, you cannot pretend to be someone or something else. True hope, true redemption will not occur through you on your own no matter what you do - only through Aslan can you participate in the redemptive process, "No good your trying, of all people. But now that Aslan is on the move..." Peter, like Lucy earlier, was trying to hide. Redemption comes through truth. 

Several years later, future Narnian heroes do dress up in an effort to hide their true nature. It fails miserably. Shasta, Aravis, Hwin, and Bree are attempting to get safely past Tashban on their journey to Narnia and decide that Aravis, Hwin, and Bree must disguise themselves. Bree cannot be seen as a warhorse being used as a packhorse by a grubby child and Aravis, hiding from her family, certainly cannot be noticed as a royal Takheena. They go through great pains to make unrevealing disguises, ones that would hide their true nature and destiny. And the disguised almost immediately fail. Bree is instantly recognized as a warhorse, and Aravis can't make it halfway through Tashbaan without being noticed by a (not very close) friend. Of course, this works out for the best, but it shows once again, that redemption does not come about by hiding and sneakiness, it must be quested after in truth, honesty, and determination to do what is right.

This now takes us to The Last Battle, where we have a number of characters who again disguise themselves and the disastrous results. 

We will explore that in our next.  

The Air of Narnia

"The Narnian air was bringing back to him a strength he had won when he sailed the Eastern Seas with King Caspian..." 

The Silver Chair

The concept of having a place dedicated for certain tasks finds itself in many areas of life. Indeed, it may even spark the modern debate of returning to the office. But the concept of hallowed ground, made sacred by our own actions or those of our ancestors, finds its source at the beginning of Jewish religious consciousness. The Talmud praises one who has a set place for prayer (Brachot 6b), "Rabbi Ḥelbo said in the name of Rav Huna: One who sets a fixed place for his prayer, the God of Abraham assists him," and goes on to assert that Abraham himself did the same. Pray in a place once, and you have prayed. Continue praying in the same place, and the place becomes a place a prayer: a place that helps you pray and where God himself comes to listen. In fact, King Solomon requested that the Temple serve as this place (1 Kings 8:29), "May Your eyes be open day and night toward this House, toward the place of which You have said, ‘My name shall abide there’; may You heed the prayers that Your servant will offer toward this place." 

Upon Eustace's return to Narnia in the Silver Chair he demonstrates strength and a sense of adventure that Jill did not expect from her schoolmate. Lewis attributes this to the Narnian air restoring to him the strength he had won decades ago (Narnian) during his adventures on the Dawn Treader. Lewis notes the same phenomenon with respect to Edmund and to Jill herself upon their second returns. Concerning Edmund, Lewis writes, "The air of Narnia had been working upon him ever since they arrived on the island, and all his old battles came back to him, and his arms and fingers remembered their old skill." 

There are two complementary ways this occurs. First, a return to a place makes it appropriate for actions that have already occurred there. When I sit in my place in the synagogue, I will naturally default to the right mindset for prayer. Second, the place itself returns to me a capability. I always pray here and thus, even if I'm not in the appropriate frame of mind, the place itself gives grants me the ability to pray. 

So too with Narnia. When Eustace, Edmund, and Jill return to Narnia they are naturally poised for adventure including the skills and hardships it comes with. Eustace's alertness, Edmund's swordplay, and Jill's stealth may have been aroused elsewhere, but in Narnia it emerges on its own. 

But even more, Narnia itself lends itself to such positive traits. Lewis makes this point via the observations of Tirian when considering Eustace and Jill, "in fact they both seemed to be already much stronger and bigger and more grown-up than they had been when he first met them a few hours ago. It is one of the effects which Narnian air often has on visitors from our world." 

Why, or how, does Narnia do this? No doubt it is due to the actions of the Narnian Lords and her other heroes who define Narnia's character. If Narnia is a place of bravery and strength, it is due to Peter the Magnificent. If it is a place of justice and righteousness, it is due to Edmund the Just. And if is a place of valiance and complete faithfulness, it is due to Lucy the Valiant. So, when Eustace and Jill (or anyone else) leave our world, one also resplendent with heroes, but also too much with the opposite, and enter Narnia these characteristics will emerge. 

There is another possible explanation specifically tied to the fact that visitors to Narnia are almost always children. Perhaps Lewis is making the following point. For better or for worse, our world keeps children as children. The Pevensies enter Narnia to insurrection, weapons, and war. Eustace is forced to join a quest of historic magnitude. Jill to responsibilities of the greatest importance. Are our children ready for that? Would we send our preteens on winter searches with a marshwiggle as a guide? Would we entrust even our young adults with national responsibility?

Children in Narnia are stronger, bigger, and more grown up because they are allowed to be just that. And that is Lewis' goal with the Chronicles of Narnia. They are children's tales with the express goal of doing something more - inculcating moral and divine truths. When our children enter Narnia, they are asked to become something even better than bigger and stronger, they are asked to be moral, truthful, and dedicated to God.