Good and bad things about this book?

Celestial said:
I suppose that assumes she would want to know Aslan in this world. if I was Susan, I'm not sure I would.
One reason I love Lucy's character is that she knows Narnia is really only about Aslan. When told she can't return, she says she doesn't mind that so much as not being able to see Aslan -- he is the whole point of Narnia for her. If Susan missed that, then she missed the whole point of Narnia. She had met Jesus in a magical world, and he sent her back to know Him in this world (thus making this world magical for her!), and she decided she'd rather not? That's tragic. Her whole life could have been a "Narnia experience" if she'd chosen to look for Aslan in this world ... instead she lost both Aslan and Narnia. :(
 
Something else to think about with Susan. In LWW, Lucy went to Narnia and no one believed her. The book states that she could have easily stated that she was pretending, but she "was a very truthful girl" and knew she was right. This was just with Lucy going once. She also could have denied it after going a second time when Edmund, who was also there, denied he actually went.

So Lucy was adamant that she had gone to Narnia when no one else believed her to the point of calling her mad while at the end, Susan refused she went to Narnia when everyone else was trying to convince her that she had actually been there. Lucy was defending the truth, Susan was defending a lie.

MrBob
 
I'm avoiding reading too much of this thread as I don't want to be spoiled (reading the book for the first time, I have seen the movie so I do know the general plot).

One of the good things about this book, is it gives a lot better background and history to Prince Caspian, and the entire world, than the movie did.

One of the bad things about this book, no Professor yet... :(
 
I'm avoiding reading too much of this thread as I don't want to be spoiled (reading the book for the first time, I have seen the movie so I do know the general plot).

One of the good things about this book, is it gives a lot better background and history to Prince Caspian, and the entire world, than the movie did.

One of the bad things about this book, no Professor yet... :(
Professor?
 
The Professor whose house Peter, Susan, Edmond, and Lucy stay at in Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe. Not sure if I missed his name being mentioned, I just thought they called him the Professor. I was hoping he'd have been in the story more, but was cut out of the movie. I'm thinking not though...
 
Well, actually the movie doesn't clue you in to much of the general plot of the book. PC takes place after they have left the Professor's house.
 
That's Professor Kirke, and no, he doesn't turn up in Caspian. And I pity you for having seen the movie first - the plot was seriously mangled in the translation. The book is a much better story.
 
Welcome Cairns! Glad to see you posting! You will I think enjoy the book, and I agree with PoTW, it's too bad you saw the movie first. It is quite different from the book.

Are you talking about LWW as opposed to PC though? The Professor's house is in LWW book.
 
Cairns, the Professor is in three books. LWW, TLB, and MN In Magician's Nephew, he is a child and it is his story. In The Last Battle, he is slightly older and is meeting with most of those who went to Narnia.

MrBob
 
Good and bad things from my perspective, just picking a few things that stand out:

Good
- I actually really like the Telmarine characterisations. Glozelle and Sopespian, to my mind, got rather too little book-time. The fact that the Telmarines weren't just a single, externalised threat led by Miraz made them a much more interesting enemy.
- Trumpkin. Trumpkin is one of my favourite characters in the whole series, because I see vastly more of myself in him than in other characters. Which is interesting, since of the three (Nik, Tkin, and Trufflehunter) Lewis clearly wants us to favour the latter. Trumpkin, though, is almost unique in the series in that despite his disbelief he is not strawmanned as acting with pure depravity/self-interest. He acts out of loyalty to Caspian and duty to Narnia as his primary motivations, which makes him quite an interesting figure.
- Reepicheep being Reepicheep. 'nuff said.

Bad
- Aslan is used as a little too much of a Deus Ex Machina in the book at times. I mean, Deus he clearly is, but Ex Machina is less necessary. Particularly the way it's "the trees come and win the battle" at the end - it rather belittles the achievements of the characters. It's worth noting that Caspian doesn't really win a single battle in the book, which is a shame.
- It is too short; of course it is a children's book, but more development of Nikabrik's plotting, of the Telmarine court, and less reliance on the one-chapter romp to suddenly win the war would've been nice to see.
 
"It's worth noting that Caspian doesn't really win a single battle in the book, which is a shame."

Well Jubal, Caspian was about 15 years old who had no military leadership experience at the time.

MrBob
 
Good and bad things from my perspective, just picking a few things that stand out:

Good
- I actually really like the Telmarine characterisations. Glozelle and Sopespian, to my mind, got rather too little book-time. The fact that the Telmarines weren't just a single, externalised threat led by Miraz made them a much more interesting enemy.
- Trumpkin. Trumpkin is one of my favourite characters in the whole series, because I see vastly more of myself in him than in other characters. Which is interesting, since of the three (Nik, Tkin, and Trufflehunter) Lewis clearly wants us to favour the latter. Trumpkin, though, is almost unique in the series in that despite his disbelief he is not strawmanned as acting with pure depravity/self-interest. He acts out of loyalty to Caspian and duty to Narnia as his primary motivations, which makes him quite an interesting figure.
- Reepicheep being Reepicheep. 'nuff said.
I agree with you -- I loved the Telmarines in the book and the film, really liked what they did with them in the film except for the accents which drove me crazy. Your comments about Trumpkin made me curious; I know Lewis in other works has trusty non-believers who are heroes or at least strong characters in the action -- such as McFee and (I can't think of his name, the professor who is murdered) in That Hideous Strength. I am going to try to think of others in CON.

Bad
- Aslan is used as a little too much of a Deus Ex Machina in the book at times. I mean, Deus he clearly is, but Ex Machina is less necessary. Particularly the way it's "the trees come and win the battle" at the end - it rather belittles the achievements of the characters. It's worth noting that Caspian doesn't really win a single battle in the book, which is a shame.
- It is too short; of course it is a children's book, but more development of Nikabrik's plotting, of the Telmarine court, and less reliance on the one-chapter romp to suddenly win the war would've been nice to see.

I don't dislike Aslan's coming in to win the day; I like that; it encourages us in the biblical themes of the CON ("The battle is the Lord's" etc.) But I would have preferred Caspian to win a battle, too. And while I love the Romp, I agree it would have been nice to have a longer book -- but I feel that way about all the CON.
 
"this never seems to be a problem for the our-worlders in heroism terms"

In LWW, the only other time a battle was commanded by a teenager, Aslan had already made out a large plan of attack that the rest of the army knew. Even with that, they were losing. They didn't start to win until Aslan came with reinforcements.

MrBob
 
"this never seems to be a problem for the our-worlders in heroism terms"

In LWW, the only other time a battle was commanded by a teenager, Aslan had already made out a large plan of attack that the rest of the army knew. Even with that, they were losing. They didn't start to win until Aslan came with reinforcements.

MrBob

That IS a pretty valid point. None of the battles were truly won until Aslan helped them to win, or came in and physically won.
 
Before reading "Eragon" I decided to read "Prince Caspian", and I loved this novel. It is interesting but is too different from the film. I prefer the book, because in essence is the original story. The writers of plot's movie invented a lot of details, as the romance between Caspian and Susan and the bridge's break. As film is more entertaining "Prince Caspian" than "The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe", but LWW is more similar to the book.
 
Yes, indeed MightyCentaur. Even the LWW movie had quite a few glaring changes, which in my opinion allowed for the even more dismal changes of the next two movies.
 
Before reading "Eragon" I decided to read "Prince Caspian", and I loved this novel. It is interesting but is too different from the film. I prefer the book, because in essence is the original story. The writers of plot's movie invented a lot of details, as the romance between Caspian and Susan and the bridge's break. As film is more entertaining "Prince Caspian" than "The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe", but LWW is more similar to the book.

Who made up the Suspian idea anyway? I wonder....

Like MightyCentaur, I agree with him for thefact that the book is better. Narnia is rather great without much romance. With romance though, in the movies.... *shudders*, it takes out most of the Narnian feel. And I'm also agreeing about the fact that, as MightCentaur says, "...LWW is more similar to the book." There were only a few changes to LWW unlike PC and VoDT. VoDT has some of those recongnizable events from the book, but the movie PC... when I watched it, the movie was waaaaay different than the book. To me, it didn't seem like Narnian-ish at all.
 
In LWW, the only other time a battle was commanded by a teenager, Aslan had already made out a large plan of attack that the rest of the army knew. Even with that, they were losing. They didn't start to win until Aslan came with reinforcements. MrBob

And killed the White Witch! I basically agree with you in this assessment. However, neither Peter nor Edmund lacked skill or courage; indeed, both were no mean warriors when it proved necessary.

The only part of the book I didn't like, as has already been mentioned, is the fact that Peter and Susan were no longer able to visit Narnia (and the same in Voyage of the Dawn Treader for Edmund and Lucy). I wonder if this may have been a contributory factor to Susan's subsequent rejection of Narnia?
 
And killed the White Witch! I basically agree with you in this assessment. However, neither Peter nor Edmund lacked skill or courage; indeed, both were no mean warriors when it proved necessary.

The only part of the book I didn't like, as has already been mentioned, is the fact that Peter and Susan were no longer able to visit Narnia (and the same in Voyage of the Dawn Treader for Edmund and Lucy). I wonder if this may have been a contributory factor to Susan's subsequent rejection of Narnia?

There are many, many possibilities. Maybe makeup and invitations made her forget Narnia, or she could have been angry with Aslan for leaving her in the shadows. But Aslan wouldn't do that.
 
Back
Top