DeLong does Jesus, sort of
Brad DeLong, Berkeley economics professor blogs about the new Narnia film. The film has raised lots of controversy among a certain brand of conservative Christian (the ones who, even at this apex of their power, complain of the anti-Christianness of American life and politics and culture).
(If you want to see an example of this carping, see an extended conversation at GetReligion, a blog I find pedantic and deceptive about its own objectivity, but which I read to get an idea of what those who disagree with me think.)
I just haven’t seen DeLong talk so directly (and Knowledgeably, on some level)about religion before. Or even to imply that there is a Christianity that has a sort of claim on him: “…but that Narnia is a kind of Christian that he (and I) do not like very much.”
Ecto blogging software
21 November 2005 at 7:46 pm.
Narnia may have some allegorical value but I always considered the books as areligious as Tolkiens works, or more recently Rowlings Potter books.( By areligious I mean without religion, I may be creating a word.) Assuming there is an allegorical element in TLTWATW, the other books are even less so, and the average reader could arrive at these connections without someone explaining the inkblot, the mistake is assuming that every action means something. Overall the themes are there but trying to draw and exact parallel to a piece of scripture or a particular churches cannon is a bit of a stretch. An average viewer/reader may only see the theme that good will triumph yada yada. Or as Dark Helmet said in Spaceballs
“evil will always triumph because good is dumb”.
PP
24 November 2005 at 8:06 pm.
I think it’s clear AND well-documented that Lewis wrote the stories to be a Christian allegory, and that Aslan is a Christ figure. I don’t think you can draw parallels to exact passages of Scripture (with the exception of Aslan’s self-sacrifice on the Stone Table, which is so obviously a crucifixion reference as to be a whack on the side of the head.
Tolkein’s work is similarly “religious” but the allegory is only slightly Christian. Purportedly, in makng up his universe, he had several highest beings, and he solved the problem in the Silmarillon by making everything the creation of the One, who’s so beyond all that the One sort of doesn’t show up anymore. Also, Tolkein is a far better writer of fiction than Lewis, so I expect Lewis to be sort of clunky.
I think that the hope in the evangelical community is that TLTWATW will be like the “Passion of the Christ” — a sort of “witnessing tool” that presents the gospel in a fun, exciting, accessible way.
I have the feeling that a number of viewers will recognize the oh-so-obvious parallels between the gospel story, and they won’t do anything after it. So everyone’s a bit disappointed, because they don’t get all of what they want.
2 December 2005 at 5:39 pm.
I will concede that TLTWATW is a christian allegory but the remaining chronicles are a bit more of a stretch although thematically they fall in line with the Christian ideals. Still I will argue that they do not promote “religion” but rather a belief system, in this case christianity.
I think where I was going with the religion angle is that religious activities plays no role in the characters life. Frodo, Harry, or reepicheep do not seem to have a religious lifestyle, meaning that church attendance, holidays, prayers, ceremony, etc. do not play a role. Remember that the evangelical christian community does not just want people to belive in God (which would be a great result of these films), they want them to conform to a pretty narrow set of guidlines to be part of their religion. Things as important as clapping while singing, watching Power Point sermons, and wearing only your best jeans to church.
Perhaps I am not correctly using the term religion. I juxtapose it with belief above to draw a distinction. Maybe there is no difference?
PP
9 December 2005 at 4:47 pm.
Polly Toynbee in The Guardian (UK): “Here in Narnia is the perfect Republican, muscular Christianity for America – that warped, distorted neo-fascist strain that thinks might is proof of right. I once heard the famous preacher Norman Vincent Peale in New York expound a sermon that reassured his wealthy congregation that they were made rich by God because they deserved it. The godly will reap earthly reward because God is on the side of the strong. This appears to be CS Lewis’s view, too. In the battle at the end of the film, visually a great epic treat, the child crusaders are crowned kings and queens for no particular reason. Intellectually, the poor do not inherit Lewis’s earth.”