>Tell me about the Narnia books.
Read them in original release order not dumbass reddit chronological order.
1. Lion Witch and Wardrobe
2. Prince Caspian
3. Dawn Treader
4. Silver Chair
5. Horse and Boy
6. Magician's Nephew
7. Last Battle
Technically you can read 5 at any point after you've finished 1, but the first four books go together and The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe is definitely the one to read first.
Because the story and themes unfold much better when read chronologically, you can see the thread of what Lewis was trying at a lot better.
Also the better books are at the beginning and they generally get more unimaginative and crap as they go on, although I remember loving The Horse and His Boy, maybe because of its simplicity.
https://i.imgur.com/ohjPxQI.jpg
Tell me about the Narnia books.
I don't think it's a great series, but the first three books are good fun and it's worth sticking it out to the end to see what happens, and they're a quick read anyway.
Oh no wonder. I always was confused why the “second” book was the most popular and not the first, like how the Black Cauldron is the most popular. It really is the first book in release date order. Release date order is the only way that makes sense. Like that stupid Star Wars thing, just watch them in release date instead of jumping back and forth like a moron.
Yeah it's just some bizarre decision by the publishers at some point to organise the series chronologically, which is even more strange in a series where time between the real and Narnian world doesn't always link up properly anyway.
Lion, Witch and Wardrobe is much better if you haven't read the Magician's Nephew since you're seeing that world for the first time, and it's also frankly the best book anyway.
You concede that "Horse and Boy" can be read at any point after "Lion Wardrobe," so your whole list only shifts "Magician's Nephew" from 1 to 6.
Please tell me why this matters to you, and what changes about the Narnia experience.
nta but the Wikipedia section explains the reasoning pretty well. Publishers really fricked it up by throwing logic out the window
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Chronicles_of_Narnia#Reading_order
Not him but Magician's Nephew is mainly an origin story which is only good after reading the core books of the series, and part of the magic of the Lion, Witch and Wardrobe is discovering the world alongside the main characters, if you already know it exists and how it was created then it would be a bit crap.
It's true The Horse and His Boy could go anywhere but it's much nicer having it around the time you get sick of the main English kids and you finally get a story which is wholly based in Narnia
Darn it, now I feel like reading Narnia again. I probably try to start reading LWW once a year, but always drop it. When the movies were coming out, I was reading the next book in the series after the movie came out. But when they stopped making movies, I stopped reading. Some day I'll read all of them.
At some point I subscribed to a Narnia videotube channel, and it's funny how isolated it seems. They really believe that their upcoming TV series or movies will pan out, and what's more: Narniagays believe it will be WILDLY successful! It's like they haven't paid attention to the majority of flash-in-the-pan franchise revivals which all die quick deaths.
>The Horse and His Boy >a story which is wholly based in Narnia
Alright I am skipping to this, that sounds cool! Going to stop daunting myself with the delusion that I'll read all of them at once in order. So far my favourite was Voyage of the Dawn Treader for reasons I don't remember. I think it had different characters, also it was a sea voyage.
>You concede that "Horse and Boy" can be read
Basically, Horse is set in the middle of a long timeskip in LWW. So if you really want to be autistic about reading the internal chronology, you'd stop reading LWW before the timeskip, read Horse, then go back and read the final chapter of LWW. This is narratively nonsense. The more important point is that the first 4 books are linked by the protagonist children and work as a set. >Please tell me why this matters to you, and what changes about the Narnia experience.
It's obvious from the narration when you read them. The narrator in LWW goes out of his way to introduce the setting, often addressing the reader directly to explain things. LWW is entirely focused on the adventures of the English children in the wondrous world of Narnia they discovered through a magic portal.
Meanwhile, Magician's Nephew is the opposite and in fact straight-up refers to other books. At one point the narrator describes the protagonist as having a curiosity that would drive him to become the [side] character you know from the other books. Also, the other-world adventures are just more complex. Narnia does not even exist when the story begins, the protagonists instead discover essentially a teleport nexus between worlds. They eventually figure out how to use the teleporters and wind up on a cursed, dying world-- depressing and intimidating, not wonderful and exciting like Narnia. It's a good story and in fact I like it a lot better than LWW. But it's most definitely not the book you should read first, unless you just really like reading stories out of order (which I do, ironically-- the difference is that I know when I'm doing it and accept the consequences).
You can do whatever you want, it's just much better story wise starting with LWW
Magician's Nephew is more of an exposition dump about Narnia than a decent narrative, which is what LWW is
The exposition dump is only fun after you've had a few Narnian adventures and are interested in what's behind it all
I read Lion, Witch, and the Wardrobe as a kid and I guess I was moronic because I completely missed the religious connections. I mean the kids are literally called "Sons of Adam and Daughters of Eve" and I still missed it. Same with veggietales too. Watched that shit all the time as a kid and it wasn't until I was 17 when I realized it was Bible stories.
The Bible itself is a reproduction of earlier stories. I don't give a damn about the mainstream abrahamic religions, and I'm definitely one of those "god ain't real jesus was fake yay science" people.
I can still enjoy the fairy story and adventure, which I never even read until I was an adult. Certainly more relatable than THY OWN HAND BRINGETH bs that makes you fall asleep with the bible. When the allegory gets heavyhanded, you can totally tell but those are few an far in-between, from what I recall - probably like twice per book that I've read. It is jarring and weird, as a non-christian. But that doesn't diminish the rest of the story for me. If you can't handle a few offensive remarks, then I get it man; you can totally pass on reading it. For me though, I'd freakin love if I found a closet with a magical portal and talking animals hell YEAH.
Yes although the most clumsily on-the-nose is LWW.
Is it true Aslan just bluntly alludes to the fact that he's Jesus at the end? Is there really no foreshadowing of this? If there was, why did Lewis feel the need to have the character state it all but outright?
>Is it true Aslan just bluntly alludes to the fact that he's Jesus at the end?
Not really, sort of I guess. As I recall he basically alludes to the fact that people in the normal world have Jesus where people in Narnia have him, or something like that (I don't think Jesus is mentioned by name, though)
But by that point, if you don't already get that Aslan is Narnia-Jesus you just haven't read the books at all. The first book has an extremely un-subtle allegory of The Crucifixion that anyone with even passing familiarity with Christianity should recognize.
Is it true Aslan just bluntly alludes to the fact that he's Jesus at the end? Is there really no foreshadowing of this? If there was, why did Lewis feel the need to have the character state it all but outright?
Comfy fantasy books. Back when fantasy wasn’t bloated nor perverted.
Soul/10, but I hate The Last Battle.
Only two have memorable scenes. For the most part they're very much made for children.
‘The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe’ and what else?
>Tell me about the Narnia books.
Read them in original release order not dumbass reddit chronological order.
1. Lion Witch and Wardrobe
2. Prince Caspian
3. Dawn Treader
4. Silver Chair
5. Horse and Boy
6. Magician's Nephew
7. Last Battle
Technically you can read 5 at any point after you've finished 1, but the first four books go together and The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe is definitely the one to read first.
Why on earth would you not read them in chronological order. The series is literally called "The Chronicles of Narnia"
Because the story and themes unfold much better when read chronologically, you can see the thread of what Lewis was trying at a lot better.
Also the better books are at the beginning and they generally get more unimaginative and crap as they go on, although I remember loving The Horse and His Boy, maybe because of its simplicity.
I don't think it's a great series, but the first three books are good fun and it's worth sticking it out to the end to see what happens, and they're a quick read anyway.
Oh no wonder. I always was confused why the “second” book was the most popular and not the first, like how the Black Cauldron is the most popular. It really is the first book in release date order. Release date order is the only way that makes sense. Like that stupid Star Wars thing, just watch them in release date instead of jumping back and forth like a moron.
Yeah it's just some bizarre decision by the publishers at some point to organise the series chronologically, which is even more strange in a series where time between the real and Narnian world doesn't always link up properly anyway.
Lion, Witch and Wardrobe is much better if you haven't read the Magician's Nephew since you're seeing that world for the first time, and it's also frankly the best book anyway.
You concede that "Horse and Boy" can be read at any point after "Lion Wardrobe," so your whole list only shifts "Magician's Nephew" from 1 to 6.
Please tell me why this matters to you, and what changes about the Narnia experience.
nta but the Wikipedia section explains the reasoning pretty well. Publishers really fricked it up by throwing logic out the window
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Chronicles_of_Narnia#Reading_order
Not him but Magician's Nephew is mainly an origin story which is only good after reading the core books of the series, and part of the magic of the Lion, Witch and Wardrobe is discovering the world alongside the main characters, if you already know it exists and how it was created then it would be a bit crap.
It's true The Horse and His Boy could go anywhere but it's much nicer having it around the time you get sick of the main English kids and you finally get a story which is wholly based in Narnia
Darn it, now I feel like reading Narnia again. I probably try to start reading LWW once a year, but always drop it. When the movies were coming out, I was reading the next book in the series after the movie came out. But when they stopped making movies, I stopped reading. Some day I'll read all of them.
At some point I subscribed to a Narnia videotube channel, and it's funny how isolated it seems. They really believe that their upcoming TV series or movies will pan out, and what's more: Narniagays believe it will be WILDLY successful! It's like they haven't paid attention to the majority of flash-in-the-pan franchise revivals which all die quick deaths.
>The Horse and His Boy
>a story which is wholly based in Narnia
Alright I am skipping to this, that sounds cool! Going to stop daunting myself with the delusion that I'll read all of them at once in order. So far my favourite was Voyage of the Dawn Treader for reasons I don't remember. I think it had different characters, also it was a sea voyage.
Yeah exactly.
I read the series to one of my kids last year (in kindergarten at the time). I went
Wardrobe, Caspian, Treader, Horse, Chair, Nephew.
>You concede that "Horse and Boy" can be read
Basically, Horse is set in the middle of a long timeskip in LWW. So if you really want to be autistic about reading the internal chronology, you'd stop reading LWW before the timeskip, read Horse, then go back and read the final chapter of LWW. This is narratively nonsense. The more important point is that the first 4 books are linked by the protagonist children and work as a set.
>Please tell me why this matters to you, and what changes about the Narnia experience.
It's obvious from the narration when you read them. The narrator in LWW goes out of his way to introduce the setting, often addressing the reader directly to explain things. LWW is entirely focused on the adventures of the English children in the wondrous world of Narnia they discovered through a magic portal.
Meanwhile, Magician's Nephew is the opposite and in fact straight-up refers to other books. At one point the narrator describes the protagonist as having a curiosity that would drive him to become the [side] character you know from the other books. Also, the other-world adventures are just more complex. Narnia does not even exist when the story begins, the protagonists instead discover essentially a teleport nexus between worlds. They eventually figure out how to use the teleporters and wind up on a cursed, dying world-- depressing and intimidating, not wonderful and exciting like Narnia. It's a good story and in fact I like it a lot better than LWW. But it's most definitely not the book you should read first, unless you just really like reading stories out of order (which I do, ironically-- the difference is that I know when I'm doing it and accept the consequences).
>The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe is definitely the one to read first
is this necessary? Can I not start with Magician's nephew then LWW?
You can do whatever you want, it's just much better story wise starting with LWW
Magician's Nephew is more of an exposition dump about Narnia than a decent narrative, which is what LWW is
The exposition dump is only fun after you've had a few Narnian adventures and are interested in what's behind it all
cool thanks
I read Lion, Witch, and the Wardrobe as a kid and I guess I was moronic because I completely missed the religious connections. I mean the kids are literally called "Sons of Adam and Daughters of Eve" and I still missed it. Same with veggietales too. Watched that shit all the time as a kid and it wasn't until I was 17 when I realized it was Bible stories.
Are they any good if you already know its a christian allegory? That just seems uber cheap to me
The Bible itself is a reproduction of earlier stories. I don't give a damn about the mainstream abrahamic religions, and I'm definitely one of those "god ain't real jesus was fake yay science" people.
I can still enjoy the fairy story and adventure, which I never even read until I was an adult. Certainly more relatable than THY OWN HAND BRINGETH bs that makes you fall asleep with the bible. When the allegory gets heavyhanded, you can totally tell but those are few an far in-between, from what I recall - probably like twice per book that I've read. It is jarring and weird, as a non-christian. But that doesn't diminish the rest of the story for me. If you can't handle a few offensive remarks, then I get it man; you can totally pass on reading it. For me though, I'd freakin love if I found a closet with a magical portal and talking animals hell YEAH.
Yes although the most clumsily on-the-nose is LWW.
>Is it true Aslan just bluntly alludes to the fact that he's Jesus at the end?
Not really, sort of I guess. As I recall he basically alludes to the fact that people in the normal world have Jesus where people in Narnia have him, or something like that (I don't think Jesus is mentioned by name, though)
But by that point, if you don't already get that Aslan is Narnia-Jesus you just haven't read the books at all. The first book has an extremely un-subtle allegory of The Crucifixion that anyone with even passing familiarity with Christianity should recognize.
Is it true Aslan just bluntly alludes to the fact that he's Jesus at the end? Is there really no foreshadowing of this? If there was, why did Lewis feel the need to have the character state it all but outright?