Secret theme behind Narnia Chronicles is based upon the stars, says new research

Interesting, though not as new as you think. It has been theorized by a while

Quote :

"Critics of Lewis said his writing was sloppy - Tolkein, for example, said the characters were a mish-mash

^Just because the books aren't written in such "depth" and dragged out to the point a person could go insane reading the first chapter... doesn't mean that "sloppy" is necessarily a bad thing. For one, the books are enjoyable by children... not surprisingly of all ages and with the launch of the movies, has brought more audience of varying ages to the series. Secondly, the symbolism itself should be enough to rival Tolkein - the perspective and understanding, the dissection of meaning & depth will change from person to person; add that to a society bent on theorizing and understanding the literature & meanings & depth from a scholarly, scientific, and intellectual levels... it's a whirlpool of possibilities and near-infinite ones at that.

I do like this theory and, even though I haven't read the books (yet), I can see how they can possibly relate. However, personally I don't believe that this or any "one" theory can truly hold sway to the various "hidden meanings"... definitely probable that there's multiple perspectives intertwined on purpose while many seem to prefer focusing with the thought of "there can be only one" or prefer building upon one more strongly over the other.

RavenwindX wrote:

^Just because the books aren't written in such "depth" and dragged out to the point a person could go insane reading the first chapter... doesn't mean that "sloppy" is necessarily a bad thing. For one, the books are enjoyable by children... not surprisingly of all ages and with the launch of the movies, has brought more audience of varying ages to the series. Secondly, the symbolism itself should be enough to rival Tolkein - the perspective and understanding, the dissection of meaning & depth will change from person to person; add that to a society bent on theorizing and understanding the literature & meanings & depth from a scholarly, scientific, and intellectual levels... it's a whirlpool of possibilities and near-infinite ones at that.

I do like this theory and, even though I haven't read the books (yet), I can see how they can possibly relate. However, personally I don't believe that this or any "one" theory can truly hold sway to the various "hidden meanings"... definitely probable that there's multiple perspectives intertwined on purpose while many seem to prefer focusing with the thought of "there can be only one" or prefer building upon one more strongly over the other.

They were light to tell that Tolkien actually called them "rubbish" that the Christianity in them was "Blantant and naive" and is even said that he threw them to the garbarge heap...

Back on topic, Lewis indeed stated that the book are a Christian allegory; to be more specific, he said it was how would Jesus appeared on an alternative universe:

Quote :

The Magician’s Nephew tells the Creation and how evil entered Narnia, The Lion etc. — the Crucifixion and Resurrection, Prince Caspian — restoration of the true religion after a corruption, The Horse and His Boy — the calling and conversion of the heathen, The Voyage of the Dawn Treader — the spiritual life (especially in Reepicheep), The Silver Chair — the continuing war against the powers of darkness, The Last Battle — the coming of Antichrist (the ape). The end of the world and the last judgement

.

Quote :

I did not say to myself ‘Let us represent Jesus as He really is in our world by a Lion in Narnia’; I said, ‘Let us suppose that there were a land like Narnia and that the Son of God, as he became a Man in our world, became a Lion there, and then imagine what would happen

I read some, though not all, of the Chronicles of Narnia. I got bored with the Magician's Nephew, though I enjoyed the rest and found the whole Calormen Empire a bit too racist (turban-wearing onion-smelling scimitar-wilding whose only redeeming feature is good storytelling a la Arabian Nights and who worship the devil) and it's hard to miss the Christianity references and the whole Aslan as Jesus thing... I mean, again, I find it an enterteining series for children but I don't like to be preached and whenever Aslan opens his mouth I feel being hammered...

I am not saying is not good to take new and fresh point of views to different matters... is just that, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar...

Maxmordon wrote:

I am not saying is not good to take new and fresh point of views to different matters... is just that, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar...

The perception of reality that exists will differ from human to human as we are all unique individuals, a product of many things (our heritage, our parents, how we were raised, the environment*s* we grew up in, hopes, goals, dreams, religion, etc.) These factors, allow us to think and see things differently.
While yes, "sometimes a cigar is just a cigar" the cigar itself can be perceived in various ways: to some the brand, length, age, place of origin will determine how well that cigar is perceived... to others the contents (paper source, tobacco, flavor, scent, atomic structure, etc.) will determine what is seen... to some, the health risk will determine what is seen. Some will be attracted, some will be repulsed, some will be neutral with an open mind & curiosity.

So while a cigar is, technically, just a cigar... as long as it exist in this reality, it will be perceived in many lights. As such, more complex things (such as literatural, art, and music) will be the subject of analysis and dissection from one individual to the next while to some... it may always simply be "just a book" or "just a song" or "just a painting/sculpture", etc.

RavenwindX wrote:

Maxmordon wrote:

I am not saying is not good to take new and fresh point of views to different matters... is just that, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar...

The perception of reality that exists will differ from human to human as we are all unique individuals, a product of many things (our heritage, our parents, how we were raised, the environment*s* we grew up in, hopes, goals, dreams, religion, etc.) These factors, allow us to think and see things differently.
While yes, "sometimes a cigar is just a cigar" the cigar itself can be perceived in various ways: to some the brand, length, age, place of origin will determine how well that cigar is perceived... to others the contents (paper source, tobacco, flavor, scent, atomic structure, etc.) will determine what is seen... to some, the health risk will determine what is seen. Some will be attracted, some will be repulsed, some will be neutral with an open mind & curiosity.

So while a cigar is, technically, just a cigar... as long as it exist in this reality, it will be perceived in many lights. As such, more complex things (such as literatural, art, and music) will be the subject of analysis and dissection from one individual to the next while to some... it may always simply be "just a book" or "just a song" or "just a painting/sculpture", etc.

I completely agree, now I feel I kind of misunderstood what you were saying. This reminds me the time I argued with my Literature Teacher for a poem by Pablo Neruda. She said it was about love and I said it was about paternity.

So yes, reality is subjective.

Quote :

Happy is the one who doesn't pretend he's right, since either everyone is right or nobody is

--Jorge Luis Borges

^^Wow, you had to argue with your literature teacher over who was "right" and who was "wrong"? That's so silly - one would think a literature teacher of all the lot would most understand the subjectivity of interpretation.

I love that quote btw, that captures precisely what I believe.
However, I'm just as guilty as the next to say "I'm right" from time to time when in reality "right" is in the eye of the beholder.

RavenwindX wrote:

^^Wow, you had to argue with your literature teacher over who was "right" and who was "wrong"? That's so silly - one would think a literature teacher of all the lot would most understand the subjectivity of interpretation.

I love that quote btw, that captures precisely what I believe.
However, I'm just as guilty as the next to say "I'm right" from time to time when in reality "right" is in the eye of the beholder.

Yes, and it wasn't a simple one either... it was a symbolist poem. But apparently with that you only have one good answer... hers...

That's one of my favorite quotes from one of my favorite writers. I think I even have it in my facebook.

We all commit that mistake, Lex. It's called be human