Magic on Narnia, Magic on Earth

Can magic be performed on Earth?

A bit of a strange question as Uncle Andrew is the Magician in The Magician's Nephew and the rings are magical. But for some reason, the White Which cannot perform her magic in our world. Is that special to Earth or is it that the magic of one world cannot be performed on the magic of another? 

Now, you might say that of course magic is transferrable, after all the Witch does plenty of magic in Narnia. Actually, not quite. You see, the Witch doesn't do any magic in Narnia in The Magician's Nephew. She understands the magic being put into Narnia, she understands the song of Aslan and she learns from it. She knows the magic put into Narnia at the very beginning. And any magic she performs comes from Narnia - it is Narnian magic used for evil. But the magic of Charn is restricted to Charn. 

If this is correct, we learn two things: (1) the magic of one world does not work on another. Every world is fundamentally different, and its magic is unique to that world. (2) The magic of Narnia, and presumably any other world, can be used for good or for evil. 

Which brings me to my final question. Who in Narnia uses magic for good? Dr. Cornelius calls himself a minor magician and does some magic, Susan's horn and the liquid of Lucy's vial are said to be magical, Bacchus and Sienus do a dance of magic... Coriander does magic as does Lucy when she reads from his book - but he's star. The music at the Snow Dance is said to be full of good magic. We talk about the Emperor's magic - but I have a hard time calling what God does magic...  

I think we need a better definition of magic... 

Tyranny, Communism, and the Terror State

I was the Queen. They were all my people. What else were they there for but to do my will?

(Jadis, Queen of Charn)

I also love none of these things in comparison with the glory and strength of my throne.

(The Tisroc of Calormen)

I realized that I rushed through the issue of the time (in our world) during which the Chronicles of Narnia took place. I said, that, "God tells His story to all people in every generation," and no doubt that is true. Aslan can appear to children (or adults) at any time. However, I believe that if Lewis had written the Chronicles during a different time, he perhaps would have written a different story. Hence, a movie remake that does shift the time, can also shift some elements of the story. Let me try to expand...

There are two great external evils that attempt to overwhelm Narnia (well, maybe three if you're counting the Lady of the Green Kirtle, but I'm going to ignore her for this post): Jadis, Queen of Charn, and Calormen. To me, these represent two types of godless government that Lewis is warning us against, tyranny and communism. Perhaps Lewis is referring to the Russian Empire, but we'll have to hold off that thought for now. 

Jadis is the evil tyrant of Russia and perhaps Germany. There is no one above her and everything else belongs to her. Hence, she can, without a moments regret, destroy every living thing under the sun. After all, they are all "mine". 

The Tisroc leads a communist regime of the USSR where no love can be above the love for the state. Hence, he hates, "These little barbarian countries that call themselves free (which is as much as to say, idle, disordered, and unprofitable)..." These are the evils attacking Narnia for they are the ones that Lewis saw.

But now let's change the time period. When the grandparents of today's children were themselves children, it was the communist regimes that were the great evil. Hence, Jadis would destroy Charn not through power, but through poverty and ruin. Today's great evil is the Terror State, and the Tisroc would be a theocratic ruler exporting terror under the guise of fairness and pity. The main elements of the story, highlighting the character of God, the Arthurian ethics, and so on, can stay the same. But the ever shapeshifting of evil would force a change of the story. 

A movie remake which shifts the time of the Chronicles could creatively change Narnia's world to reflect evil in its time. Of course, this would require a religious figure brave enough and bold enough to call out evil for what it is. We will see if such people are making these movies. 

Stories Retold

In our previous post we discussed stories that could be attached to the Chronicles of Narnia. The easiest part is to identify stories to be added, in fact, Lewis himself identified several such stories and there are certainly sufficient characters and events that could be fleshed out into full length stories. The more difficult part would be writing the story in a way that would reflect Lewis. While any given individual will have their own style and approach, there are certain key elements that characterize the Chronicles that should also undergird the addition. 

If such is true when conceiving a story of the Chronicles, how much more so should it be when retelling a story. Now, of course, a retelling does not have to be a retelling. It could, for example, be satire or parody like Puffs and Spaceballs. But then everyone knows what the point is. Where harm might be done is when a retelling is advertised as a retelling but its key elements are diluted, changed, or undermined. 

What are the key elements in a piece of literature? Well, that is also going to be subject to debate. One may argue that everything is a key element. In a previous post I (not too seriously) suggested that the color of Lucy's hair could be important in demonstrating her dedication to Aslan. She is described as golden-haired similar to Aslan's golden mane. On the opposite end of the spectrum, one might argue that only the overall plot is key. Hence, as long as the Magician's Nephew, for example, has a Magician with a nephew, some other worlds, and so on that's good enough. After all, look at I Robot where names are the same, but the storyline is not related at all. 

I would argue more along the lines of the first possibility. A proper retelling should convey the ethics, themes, lessons, and morals of the original. Preferably, the setting and storyline should be the same too, and, to really do a good job, as much as possible should be kept. So, how can we assess the retelling of The Magician's Nephew. 

1) Obviously, the most controversial issue so far is the casting of a woman as the voice of Aslan. This is clearly a slap in the face to Christianity and should be abhorred by all. I should also say that any comment that the way Aslan looks is inspired by a flesh and blood human being is, to me as a Jew, blasphemous. I do not think this is quite as much of an attack on Christianity since for Christians God became a man. So maybe someone's looks can be inspired by Jesus' looks. However, we do not have a portrait or photograph of Jesus so there is the very real question as to whose looks should inspire the Jesus-like figure in Narnia. There are, of course, great people who might serve that purpose, none of whom were chosen. 

2) The time period. I'm not too upset about this because God tells His story to all people in every generation. However, it does set up some questions of historical relevance.

We'll continue this next time... 

Stories Untold

Why was the Land of Telmar unpeopled when the pirates from our world were transported there?

How did Fair Olvin turn the Giant Pire into stone?

What happened at the Fight of Zalindreh?

The Chronicles of Narnia leaves stories untold. And not just side stories that one might create, like the fight between Corin and the Lapsed Bear of Stormness, or why is Ram the King of Archenland called Ram the Great, but stories where Lewis tells us that he is not telling us the story. 

This of course leaves open the possibility that someone else can fill in the story. How would one approach telling such a story? You can just make up a story. The fight of Zalindreh (which is the same as the fight of Zulindreh?) does not necessarily have to have anything to do with Narnia and its future. It could just be a good story. But that wouldn't make it part of the Chronicles of Narnia. 

To be a part of the Chronicles we would expect the story to have certain Narnian characteristics. For example, the story detailing the feat of Fair Olvin should reflect, like much of Narnian ethics and honor code, the knights of King Arthus, with Olvin playing the role of Jack the Giant Killer and the two-headed Pire modeled after the two-headed Thunderdell. Of course, we would expect Aslan to come in somewhere, perhaps to give Olvin the means of turning the giant into stone. And the story would have to manifest the themes of a Roman god reflecting an aspect of the true God. This would perhaps be the hardest part of composition. Manifesting the themes of Neptune as the god of the sea seems a bit out of theme for a fight in the desert between Archenland and Calormen. But maybe Uranus the father of the Titans and the primordial god of the sky or Vulcan the god of smiths and rocks. 

Whatever the particular choice one makes the path is clear. To be part of the Chronicles of Narnia, a book has to respect the Chronicles of Narnia. The primordial stories must be kept intact, the story has to fit somewhere in Narnian history and have some impact upon it, and the writing, while no one can be Lewis, must try to accomplish what Lewis tried, bringing to light and teaching as if by osmosis, an aspect of the true God past the eyes of the watchful dragons. 

If that is so for stories untold, how much more so for stories retold... but that is for another post. 

Shrouding Hope...

Apologies for not posting during the holidays, it's been busy even with a lot of the days falling out on weekends. I have a few hopefully interesting posts that will come out soon. In the meantime, if anyone wants to continue thinking about the Days of Awe, I recently wrote this article:

Unetanneh Tokef: Shrouding Hope in a Vision of Judgement