Which order do you think the books should be read in?

What order?

  • Written (LWW, PC, VoDT...)

    Votes: 87 46.0%

  • Chronological (MN, LWW, HHB...)

    Votes: 89 47.1%

  • Other (Please specify)

    Votes: 13 6.9%
  • Total voters
    189
fishbulb4F18 said:
I just finished reading the Chronicles for the first time. Sadly, I was unaware of the 'controversy' regarding the reading order. Since the box set I bought was already numbered (with MN being number one) I just dove on in and read them. In retrospect, I would love to be able to read them fresh again and this time read them in order of publication.
Click to expand...

I saw a news headline a few days ago that said scientists have developed a pill that can erase bad memories. And no this wasn't on a tabloid paper. Instead of erasing bad memories (there's an ex-wife joke in there somewhere) what about selected memories period?

Imagine seeing your favorite movie for the first time over and over again? Or rediscovering Narnia?
 
Last edited:
dawnpatrol said:
I would recommend any first time reader to read the books in the published order. A quote from LWW:

"They say Aslan is on the move—perhaps has already landed."

And now a very curious thing happened. None of the children knew who Aslan was any more than you do; but the moment the Beaver had spoken these words everyone felt quite different. Perhaps it has sometimes happened to you in a dream that someone says something which you don't understand but in the dream it feels as if it had some enormous meaning.

That passage would've all been for naught had you already read The Magicians Nephew.
Click to expand...


huh. Good point. Somehow, i like reading them in chronological order better, though I have read it both ways. For a first time reading, it might be better to re LWW first. MN is very heavy/thick. I know several people who got discouraged and gave up reading the series because they began to read MN and couldn't get through it (something I don't truly understand.)

When i read them though, as I said I read them in chronological order. I feel as though they flow better and I can get more into the truths that motivate Lewis' work. To see Narnia born, and die, is best when there is a plot line in the middle, IMO
 
I read VofDT first; borrowed it from a friend, who loves the series and especially VofDT. For me that was a good introduction to the Narnia books, which I didn't know as a child.
After that I read LWW, have read all of them several times by now.
If I should choose between beginning with MN or LWW, I would definetily choose LWW. It's a better introduction to Narnia, in my view, and my favourite book of the series.
When I first read MN, I thought it was a bit strange. I have reread it not long ago, and liked it better this time.
But still - LWW first!!
 
Personally I think I would read them the way they published first. That's how I read them first. LWW, PC, etc. I think you get alot of surprises that way, plus Lewis didn't plan for LWW to have sequels at first anyway.

Then once you've read them, if you love/like them enough to reread them, read them the way C.S. Lewis want them read, MN, LWW, etc. I would normally read them that way. I'm not saying a first time reader should read it that way. They could if they want to.
 
I was introduced to the series with LWW, and I think (though it was a long time ago mind) that when my mother read them to me she read TMN last of all, so it was kinda like a "Oh so that's how it all started" kind of thing.

I've never really liked TMN though.
 
Well, I think that if you read LWW first, when you finally get to TMN it wouldn't be as exciting because you already know who the lion is and what is going to happen. I think that it kind of ruins the story. But when I first heard of narnia, I didn't even know that there was a book that came before LWW so I did read it first. I love narnia so much that the story was still exciting. It has been exciting the last three times that I've read it!
 
I think they should be read in the order they were written the first time they're read. I don't really have a reason, but that's what I've always thought. After that it probably doesn't matter and at some point I want to read them in cronological order just to see how they feel that way.
 
I dunno. Personally, I read LWW first, when I was 7. When I was about 12 I read the first half of VDT. Then near my 15th birthday I read PC, VDT, SC, skipped HHB & MN, read LB. Went back about a week later and read MN, then HHB. Then re-read LWW.

Therefore, though I don't think they should be read in that order, I think that LWW should be read first, no matter.
Maybe this; LWW, HHB, PC, SC, MN, LB.
Because MN is not exactly a very exciting book (though one of the best), it wouldn't be a good idea to start out with that one (my friend did and now she wont pick up another Narnia book...=/)...
 
I can't remember what order I first read them in, and now I've read them all so many times (I read them all at least once a year, and I'm now 27!) that it doesn't make that much difference to me.

When I was younger I always assumed that chronological order was best, partly because that's what Lewis himself supposedly wrote to someone who asked. However, as I've got older I think I disagree with Lewis on that. I am now inclined to think that publication order is best, because there are things he says in later published books that don't make that much sense unless you realise that he is providing an explanation for something chronologically later but published earlier. So I have now changed the order of the books on my shelf from chronological to publication order.

Peepiceek
 
I tend to agree. So many things in The Magician's Nephew seem to be written with a nudge and a wink that you have to guess he's pausing for you to say, "So THAT'S where it came from!"

I'll give you an example...from STAR WARS. The first three films were episodes 4, 5 and 6. Then they went back to show the beginning of things with 1, 2 and 3. There's a joke in episode 2 when Obi Wan looks at Annakin (Darth Vader) and says with exasperation, "Some day you'll be the death of me..." And how about the appearance of baby Luke and Leia in tragic episode 3. Now take a new kid who's never seen any of the films and show them in chronological order and the "Oh my!" moment you get when baby Luke is dropped off at the farm on Tattoine is just not there. Neither is the punch of Obi Wan's morbid joke.
 
I'm totally with you on the Star Wars. I think the parallelism of Anakin's fall to temptation (Episode III) with Luke's resistance to it (Episode VI) is so much more powerful if you've seen VI first. But that said, I like watching them in chronological order, so that kind of undermines my own point.

Peepiceek
 
I always read them in chronological order because that's how I started out but the next time I plan on reading them (very very soon) I'm going to try written order.
 
I think they should be read in the publication order, because it is right to start out with the Pevensies journey into Narnia and then the get backstory and creation of Narnia later on. Also it says in LWW that we don't even know Aslan yet, and if you read Magician's Nephew first you would already know who Aslan is before you even read The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe.
 
Well, I think they should mostly be read chronologically, but I know that in the case of the Magician's Nephew, it will mean a lot more after reading the other books. Also, it is nice to be introduced to Aslan at the same time as the characters are, so the Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe makes a good one to start with. My personal solution is just to read them all again and again, and after the first time the order doesn't matter anyway! The debate about this does make things annoying when you get the books one at a time as your allowance allows, from different publishers, and you end up with a mixed set of books that are numbered 1,1,3,5,4! In case your wondering, this is what happened to me, and the books that I have are MN, LWW, HHB, VDT, and SC. (If that is how you abbreviate them)
 
Last edited:
Back
Top