REVIEW: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe by C.S. Lewis

REVIEW: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe by C.S. LewisThe Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe (The Chronicles of Narnia #2) by C.S. Lewis
Published by Harper Collins (1950), Paperback, 206pg
Filed under: Children's, Fantasy, Fiction
Got my copy from: Gift
Buy your own copy at Amazon or BookDepository (affiliate links | info) or add it to your Goodreads shelf

three-half-stars

When Peter, Susan, Edmund and Lucy took their first steps into the world behind the magic wardrobe, little do they realise what adventures are about to unfold. And as the story of Narnia begins to unfold, so to does a classic tale that has enchanted readers of all ages for over half a century. (from Goodreads)

This is more like a discussion/thoughts sort of thing than a proper review. If you haven’t read this book already, you may be in trouble. Sorry!

I mentioned somewhere else that I put off rereading this series– and this book in particular– because I’d been wounded by the sneaky Christianity stuff as a youngun. Nowadays I don’t care about that: in fact, I enjoyed picking out the different Biblical references! I also found something else out: there’s more than Bible stuff in here. There’s lots of mythological things from other countries and cultures, and it’s all mixed together in a kind of glorious fantasy literary dessert.

For example, near the end there’s the dance with Bacchus and all the animals and forest beings and whatnot. (Pretty hedonistic stuff for a kids’ book!) It’s a return of all the beings that were kicked out/in hiding during the White Witch’s reign, sure, but it’s also a symbol of regrowth and stuff (right?). And, see, I don’t know anything about Bacchus or that other dude who was there except for the hedonism/orgy stuff, so a lot of the more subtle meanings are lost to me.

Usually I don’t feel the need to do any deeper background research on books, but occasionally (as in the case with Laura Ingalls Wilder’s books) I’ll want some more depth to my stories.

Though it’s a perfectly fine story on its own, I can’t help but think that I’d enjoy it even more if I could recognize some more of the references CSL worked into the story. I’m also wondering if he MEANT for children to get these references– or are they a kind of literary parental bonus?1

A weird thing that happened to me was that I couldn’t stop picturing the 1979 animated movie version while reading it. Like, the scene with Lucy and Susan and the mice nibbling of Aslan’s ropes. I can remember the scene from the movie very clearly, and it kept overtaking the actual book version of that scene while I was reading it. Same thing with when it finally became Christmas and Santa showed up. What should have been a very emotional/uplifting scene was ruined by my memories of some other thing entirely. Very annoying!

(Does anyone else remember watching that movie? Has the same thing happened to you?)

There were, of course, some annoyingly dated things in this book. The whole thing about war being worse when women fight, for example, was completely ridiculous. And then Lucy becomes known for kicking butt in battle anyway! Ha. And everyone is white and British-y and upper crust– even the animals, which was weird. On the whole, though, it wasn’t AS annoyingly dated as it could have been, I guess? And there are worse things in some of the later books, anyway.

Despite the problems, I think this reread of The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe was entirely successful! I enjoyed myself, and while I’m not sorry I put it off for so long, I DO wonder what would have happened if I’d read it sooner. Maybe I would have gone to see the new movies when they were in the theaters, eh?

Read: June 8-9, 2013

Footnotes

  1. Children did seem to cover that sort of thing more in school back then, though. I don’t remember doing any sort of mythology studies except for ancient Egypt, and even that was a bonus thing outside of regular classes.

About Anastasia

Anastasia is 25-year-old lady who is now an Official Californian! She loves books, wasting time on the internet, and collecting things related to Sherlock Holmes. Visit her blog | Follow her on Twitter
Bookmark the permalink.

7 Comments

  1. The Narnia books were favourites of mine when I was a little, but I haven’t reread them for ages. It’s funny, but when I think of Narnia, I always think of Turkish delight. I remember the first time I tried real Turkish delight (not the candy bar, which up until then I’d always thought was the same as the candy in the book) and I was so pleased at its taste. Far more tempting than what I’d originally thought!

  2. That’s the tricky part of adaptations, especially when you watch them first: it’s so difficult to keep the streams from crossing. It took me a good long while to separate out The Lord of the Rings and Peter Jackson’s film trilogy.

    • I’m forever having that problem and it’s super annoying– especially when the movie version isn’t as good as you’d want it to be, so then you’re stuck with a subpar version of the story in your head. Bleh.

  3. I’ve never seen the animated version, but the BBC adaptation ruined the books for me when I was a kid. Everyone else seems to love them, but I saw them as someone else’s poor immitation of a story I loved. Whenever I tried to reread the books post-BBC-viewing, the imagery supplanted my own conception of Narnia and the characters. It took me a good decade to kick the miniseries out of my skull.

    I like the more recent film adaptations, though. And the long gap between rereadings gave me some time to learn about Christianity, which made the books that much more fun when I came back to them as an adult.

    • I just found the BBC miniseries in my closet! I’m going to watch it next week because I can’t remember it at all and that seems a shame.

      Good to know the newer movie versions are fun to watch! I’ll add them to my “to watch” list.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>