Catholic-ometer: 4.5 of 5
Enjoyability: 3.5 of 5
The second published book in the Chronicles of Narnia series was Prince Caspian; and I have to admit, it didn't make much of an impression on me the first time I read it. That perspective has since changed, though I still feel that there are many weaknesses in the writing of the story, which should be pointed out.
For one thing, the tale is divided into a number of sections, which differ drastically from one another, meaning that the narrative doesn't exactly flow. There are, I think, five distinct sections, each very different from the others. The arrival of the children, the backstory of Caspian, the journey towards Aslan's How, the battle with Miraz, and the victories of Aslan; the last being perhaps the most jarring and bizarre of the five, although there's obviously a reason for that.
The first section of the tale; the arrival of the children, is largely set-up for the story. Not much is said or done of any consequence, other than a brief exploration of the area they've found themselves in, and a realization of where they are. They eventually meet a dwarf, who initiates the second section.
Caspian's backstory is fairly interesting. We find out that King Miraz (who's actually a usurper; not the real king,) and his people; the Telmarines (basically human beings,) have pretty much taken control of the land away from its native peoples, and have been trying to erase even the records of their past existence. It's only through testimony by his nurse, and a half-dwarf that Caspian even learns about the mythical beasts who once peopled Narnia at all.
This section of the story is perhaps the most disturbing if read by itself. The reason is that a few protestant communities genuinely believe that the real "church" was suppressed by the Catholic Church, and all records of it destroyed; a belief only supported by individual preachers, who arose in the last century and a half or so. One might easily conclude, at first, that Miraz is meant to be an allegory for the modern Catholic Church, and therefore, that this book is blatantly anti-Catholic, but I don't consider that likely, and I'll explain why in just a moment.
The third section of the book is basically the kids and the dwarf wandering in the wilderness, in search of Aslan's How, where Caspian awaits. In my opinion, this section drags on a bit too long, but at least its message is quite clear; when Aslan (God) tells you to go someplace, you do it.
The setup is this; to get where they need to be, the children need to get across a gorge, so they try to explore a bit and see if there's some route around it; some place where they could cross. Aslan wants them to go one way, and Lucy warns them about this, but none of the others saw him. They wind up getting themselves lost in the woods for a while, and nearly killed by the enemy, before turning back and going Aslan's way; across the gorge by a series of solid rocks that they hadn't been able to see at first.
Sometimes, the answer to our problems is right in front of us, but the path just seems too difficult or dangerous. We take account of the wind and the waves, and forget to keep our eyes on the one person who truly matters. In retrospect, this may have been the high point of the story.
In section four, some of Caspian's men betray him, and try to summon the White Witch, but they're killed before they can complete their spell. Caspian refuses to be a part of any of their black magic, trusting in Aslan, even though he hasn't shown up yet. Peter and the other kids do show up, however, and Peter offers to fight Miraz in single combat.
This is the point where the anti-Catholic accusations are handily disarmed. Peter is clearly an allegory for Saint Peter; the first Pope, and all successive popes by extension, and Miraz, as I've said already, is clearly not a real king (not a real pope,) but a usurper (a heretic.) In many ways, the battle between Peter and Miraz has more of the tone of Athanasius against Arius or the Iconoclast heresy than the Catholic Church vs protestants, but regardless, the fact remains that if Lewis had meant this to be an allegory for an accusation against the church, he would probably have had someone other than Peter battle Miraz, and definitely wouldn't have kept referring to Miraz as a usurper of the throne. Miraz is a heretic who needs to be put into his place. That's how I read this allegory, which might as well be a history of the early church.
The victories of Aslan are sprinkled throughout and past the fourth section, but are so drastically different from it, that I list them separately anyway. Of course, the wrapping up of the story is left to Aslan, as always, but there's also a very strange scene, where he trapses through a town with a crowd of magical folks, and starts magically transforming it back into old Narnia. Desks and walls turn into bushes and trees, very good people join his side, and very evil people metamorph into brute animals or plants. The entire scene is simultaneously whimsical and gruesome; a rare feat in a book like this, and the reason for this is obvious; God (Aslan) divides people just like this. To the just, he's a dream come true. To the wicked, he's their worst nightmare.
The allegories are harder to read in Prince Caspian than they were in the Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, and I didn't really enjoy the book as much; the main reason being that it wasn't as exciting. The White Witch was an everpresent and menacing figure (at least at first.) Miraz is only in a couple of scenes, and even then, makes only a very small impression on the readers. Somehow, I just don't think that Lewis enjoyed writing villains, though he could do so competently if he needed to. I just don't feel he did that here.
Regardless, this book is fair material for Catholics to read, though, as I said, not as good as the first. It's not all that exciting for the most part, but it has some fairly good things to say.
No comments:
Post a Comment