Image Hosted by

Off the top

A blog dedicated to the Source of everything good.

Friday, December 23, 2005

Which Narnia personality are you?

As Jill, you are confident, respectful, and a little bit bossy! You have an acquired taste for adventure, and love any challenge that you have to face.

Hmmm, on the “confidence” question, I put myself in the middle. Go figure! I do enjoy a challenge, though wouldn’t say that I love any or all challenges. Not sure that any taste for adventure that I have is acquired, either. Actually, I’d put it more as a taste for exploration than for adventure. But...well, can’t think about these things too much! LOL

Oh, and apparently, before I was born, my name was almost Jill instead of Bonnie. I think I'm glad for the name I got :-).

HT: Catez Stevens

BTW, my family and I went to see “The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe” the other night. We all enjoyed it, including my almost-four-year-old daughter! (She’s seen the BBC version so’s familiar with the story.) I was a little disappointed by the departures from the book, minor though they were (call me a purist :-) ), but was glad to see the major themes clearly set out.

I concur with everyone else that Lucy was great, as was Edmund. And I couldn't help but adore the beavers. Peter was a doll, maybe too much of one, but that made the idea of an ordinary, “nice” teen rising to the occasion and doing extraordinary, courageous things work. Wasn’t so impressed with the White Witch, except for her part in the battle scene (she was fierce, and tough!) – she didn’t seem evil enough! Maybe it was the make-up. Tumnus was almost too familiar-acting to Lucy, but I guess that was the point. I also kinda wanted the professor to be more veiled in a sage-like sort of way. But no biggie.

The battle scene was great. However, I would’ve rather that less of the movie be taken up with that and more time spent on Edmund’s trek to the White Witch’s palace and on other things that were given more time in the book. The opening scene with the Pevensy children leaving London was effective, though, and actually maybe the most moving part of the film, except for the girls' mourning over Aslan’s body.

Which reminds me: perhaps there is more than mere allegory to Jesus and the Marys in Lewis’ having the girls witness Aslan’s slaughter (though not the actual moment itself -- they didn't look) and be, not traumatized or revolted, but deeply grieved. The emphasis is not on the slaughter and death itself, but on what it means. I think there could be a lesson in this for our societal view of these things and for the way we handle them with children, as well as with each other, for that matter. (Although Aslan’s slaughter in the film was mysteriously bloodless...)

It’s funny, I was glad, for C. S. Lewis’ sake, that the movie was made and made so well, because of the propagation of his contributions to mankind that it represents. But then I was reminded that Lewis himself disdained film because it didn’t properly represent books nor allow the viewer’s imagination to blossom as the reader's of a book might. Someone somewhere (sorry, can’t remember who or where) thought that Lewis would not have approved nor liked the current movie.

Well, perhaps not. But insofar as it introduces people to his stories and to the allegories in his stories, and insofar as one of his purposes for writing was to bring Christianity to the masses in an accessible and authentic way, I myself have trouble believing that he would reject the movie altogether.


Post a Comment

<< Home