Lewis was definitely a genius in his own way but Pageau's criticism is fair. He isn't saying that a centaur had to be sexualized. He is saying that a centaur is half horse, half human, there is symbolism to be extracted from that in many forms: what does it mean to have horse legs? But in Narnia they are just guys with horse legs, there is no symbolism. But there is actually good symbolism in Narnia, it's just that there isn't as much as there could be - like he said.
Well in Narnia IIRC centaurs are repeatedly portrayed as being basically regal, serious creatures. I'm not sure if that lines up with the proper mythology of the centaur, but I wouldn't say in Narnia they're simply guys with horse legs. They absolutely have their own character that is very distinct from the other creatures.
No, he is saying that as in real life we use symbolism all the time, the whole world uses symbolism all the time, all cultures, all religions, all art. Then someone creates a fictional world and somehow has not grasped that a world with no symbols is not real, it's just superficial and silly
He wrote them for children and was very clear that children were his audience; They were intentionally innocent for his audience. If you imagine he heard portions of Tolkien’s LOTR stories in progress and he escaped into the innocence of his own stories.
I agree with what you're saying but Narnia, in my opinion, is supposed to be a gateway drug of sorts to youngsters so that they can drip their toes into these concepts and not be overwhelmed. The books are not quite as rich as they could be and that's sad for us adults but if it gets kids into this kind of thing than it served a good purpose, as it did indeed in my case.
hmm i don't know, what work for kids can also work for adults too if you know how to layer the story properly and the depth it can bring can be depend on the demographic understanding to interpretative the story
@@somedude9828 I agree with that for sure. There are things I enjoy about Narnia to this day as an adult and funnily enough Lewis wrote that "children's stories which only appeal to children are not good stories" paraphrased. There are plenty more stories out there that have a greater degree of depth and symbolic richness but they are intended for adults, no?
@@47StormShadow yes there is plenty of story out there intended for adults, it's just what that story are actually about and how it unfolded itself from beginning to end is what matter, because a story that are not guided you through it layer of depth of what it is trying to telling to you than it's not a good story in my opinion
From Narnia and Harry Potter, I always saw the centaur inhabit the role of the philosopher. In essence, these centaurs were descended of Chiron as opposed to the standard stock. Lewis in his general mythology believed that the shadows of our myths pointed to greater truths in God's creation. This is such as the friendly and small dragon on Perelandra which is how a dragon on an incorrupt world would appear and behave.
Lewis, from what I understand, liked playing with the idea of a sort of 'baptized paganism'. Like Chesterton and other what I would call Christian romantics, they loved what was good in the old world, so to speak, and wanted to transform it in the new life of the Gospel. He was very intentional about this inn his writings, and if memory serves even Bacchus made an appearance. Puritans, or at least purists seem to be allergic to this kind of literary ecumenism but C.S. Lewis wasn't just randomly playing around. Not that Jonathan suggests this at all, just my two cents!
Right on, I just dropped in but I totally agree! The part about Baccus always stuck out to me as being a bit too pagan for a Christian children's story. But I'll always love CS Lewis. And all the people criticizing him probably did not achieve the kind of popularity that he did. He's one of the most well known authors and for good reason.
Currently reading Narnia to 7 year old and it has had beautiful and profound affect on whole family… I like what someone said about it being a ‘baptized paganism’. When she’s 11-12(?) I look forward to exploring LOR.
Tolkien- schmolkien - he didn’t like Lewis mixing up mythological characters either, but I’m glad it didn’t hold him back. The chronicles are timeless and lovely.
Interesting perspective - as a female, I tend to want to see the satyr in the books as symbolic of how someone can appear nice and harmless, but in reality be hiding a violent intent that won't be revealed until it is too late. Like a wolf in sheep's clothing.
As a woman, I see that too, I think it’s obvious actually. He quite literally lied to Lucy in the beginning and manipulated her into his house under the guise of being her friend, but he secretly was going to kidnap her for the white queen, hence his lullaby he played to put her to sleep. He saw Aslan in the fire and felt guilt for his horrible motives. Not everything needs to be sexual… you can take a trait of something and keep it, but tone it down for general audiences, while still keeping some of that source. A centaur does not always need to be aggressive or sexually charged, neither does a saytr. These books and films were made for children… they’re not going to put a rapist saytr and a horny bull man just because some people take their origin so literally. They’re also not real, they can be whatever we want them to be. He did absolutely fine.
The part I think Mr. Pageau and many commenters seem to miss is that the fauns and centaurs and so on of Narnia aren't those of the Classical world, but the mythical creatures of the Romantics and neo-Romantics. They aren't intended to invoke the same sensibilities of the mythical beings of Classical myth but to invoke a sense of Arcadian mystery and fantasy.
I think it’s possible that could have been some type of rebellion against the idea that we can see the character or salvation of a person based on certain qualities. Just a thought
This is so wrong. Okay, so he doesn’t use the traditional Greek mythological connotations with these creatures, but he creates his own. The fauns through Mr Tumnus very much came across to me as the friendly, warm, party loving, pleasure seeking guys (kind of like hobbits). The centaurs are 1000% represented as the wiser, stronger beings, with a lot of memory (kind of like the elves in LOTR). And then we have the animals which are there to pad out the demographic for the sake of kids, these are children’s books at the end of the day! It’s also difficult to have you critique someone when you are accusing him of failing to do that which he never claimed to try. It’s like me saying you’re video didn’t talk much about the weather or what Kim Kardashian was wearing last night, when that’s not even the intent of the video in the first place. So I think this guy gotta be careful to not impose his wants from a book and the things HE thinks it should be doing, or the ways in which he thinks it’s lacking because of his own assumption that it’s supposed to serve him personally. I for one saw all the deeper qualities in these creatures. As deep as C.S Lewis wanted it to go. And it may not be as deep as LOTR, but it’s not LOTR, it’s Narnia
Absolutely what I was thinking - centaurs and fauns very much had a character of their own. Especially loved what he did with marshwiggles and unicorn. Also showed the distinct nature of talking horses, giants, and dwarves - both red and black. All characters genius had unique characterisations!
@@nahumkhokhar3441exactly. LOTR is SUPPOSED to be world building and deep and lore-filled. Narnia is supposed to be an enchanting children’s story with metaphors and deeper meanings and symbolism teased and scattered throughout. They do have distinct energies about them as I said, but to criticise Lewis for it not being DEEP ENOUGH when that’s not what he even wanted is silly. It’s like me telling a sad story and someone criticising me for it not being funny… that’s not the intent 🤣
I don't think Johnathan meant it wasn't "deep enough." The idea is that certain figures already have this symbolism built into them because of the already established myths. It's fine that he used them in his own way, but people well versed in myths will see that there is a bit of a disconnect between his version and the pattern they are used to seeing. Maybe Lewis did that on purpose, but it's still there nonetheless.
I don't think Jonathan is articulating something he subjectively wants, he's making a very specific criticism about the overall coherence of the series. Albeit in short form and few words.
I think there were small hints that the parties with the manaeds got a little wild in Narnia. Even at eight or nine, I wanted to get ahold of Nymphs and Their Ways off Mr. Tumnus's bookshelf and read it for myself.
This is exactly why the Lord of the Rings has had so much more cultural impact than the Narnia books. As a side note, and I would love it if Jonathan would explore this in a future video, there is so much Christian symbolism in the Lord of the Rings. For example, the death and resurrection of Gandalf after his battle with the Balrog. The return of Aragon as the true king, but a king who was meek and humble, as opposed to the arrogant house of Stewards who were on the throne of Gondor, who were meant to only be caretakers of the throne. There is much more …
This is a valid take, but I would argue that Lewis based all his centaurs on Chiron, who was stately, wise, and nothing like the rest of his kin. Fauns are Etruscan and Roman; they look a lot like the Greek satyrs but are distinct from them. While satyrs are lustful and violent, fauns are benign. Tumnus is actually a very accurate faun. I'd much rather have Lewis' unusually refined centaurs and fauns than cringe like the awkward can-eating goat boy (who actually *is* a satyr, not a faun) and "party ponies" in Percy Jackson. 🤮
If you read Lewis' letters from the devil to his cousin you understand him better, Narnia was made to be popular because his friend was doing well making escapism.
The LOTR is really a lot more about expressing the essence of the mythological things, rather than denuding them in an almost post-industrial way, like Narnia somehow does…😅
I think Lewis was much more taken by the whimsical sensation of exploring a mythology than Tolkien who was trying to emulate the mythologies we see in reality.
Though it has been quite some time since I visited Narnia, I think Lewis used the symbolism of centaurs in a way that was appropriate for his targeted audience. The sexual connection would have been difficult to use in books written for children. Instead he connected centaurs to philosophy and a sense of mysterious honor.
Hm, cool. CA Lewis’s space trilogy might have done that better. A series I read as a kid that has characteristics linked to the creature type really well is Redwall
Well, maybe CS Lewis didn’t know or else maybe he knew this was a kids book and he didn’t want to do that. So that’s getting awfully technical if you ask me.
I wouldn't say that..cause as long as they live in narnia and belief in aslan (christian=jesus) and worship him as they King...they are not ruled by their "aggressiv" nature. And then in "Prince Caspian" there is a wild bear who attack Lucy. She ask why the animals can't no longer talk and the dwraft answers, that aslan is gone long ago, the beasts turn wild cause they forgot him, no longer belief in him and forgot who they really are. Which seems to me to be an christian allegory to what happens if you forget that christ lives in you. So i think Lewis create this by purpose and as I know Lewis and Tolkien gets in a discurs cause they show christian themes so differently. Just my piont of view😅
I'm almost done listening to all the audiobooks and the series is just okay imo. I had previously only read the first book a long time ago and loved it. I did enjoy it very much this time around but I'd say the rest of the books are mostly just boring.
Pfft. Narnia isn't here. Centaurs there would necessarily have different qualities. Tolkien wrote about earth. He was bound by different effects of the earthly fall.
Jadis was the hero trying to save Narnia from the false god Aslan. Aslan was a false god because unless you write God into the story as 100% identical to God IRL, you're writing a false god. If Aslan WAS just how Jesus interracted with the fantasy world of Narnia, He'd need to be a humble Jewish carpenter regardless of whether or not that made sense to a setting where there are no humans, let alone Jewish ones. Same goes for Eru Illuvitar being a false god in Tolkien by not being 1:1 in description to the Bible.
I don't think having centaurs being sex crazed fiends would have worked for books written primarily for children, no matter how profound for all audiences they are.
Ok on the surface Pageau is right, but dig deeper and see that the mythical creatures still are themselves but are being transfigured. Mr Tumnus for example is a faun who was going to lull his victim asleep with his panpipe, but then felt remorse. The Centaurs in the Caspian are the most violent and warlike of the creatures.
Those who know mythology lore know that it was satyrs not centaurs that were sexual it was not until the mid 1900s that centaurs were depicted as sexual. Also using orcs from the lord of the rings fails as an example of correct personification because orcs from myth look like a man with pig features such as a boars tusk shape teeth on the bottom jaw and the nose. The symbolism in Narnia is more accurate than this video can deny. It is literally the symbolism not mentioned in this video that stand more true and accurate such as the correlation between Narnia and the Bible. But saying that Lewis failed in Symbolism while his friend and fellow author Tolkien was more successful is like saying that oxygen is as far from air as water is from fire. Tolkien and Lewis bounced ideas off each other for the books. And they both spent a lot of time researching myth and lore. Traditionally centaurs were violent and war like and that is why the centaur Chiron trained many heroes of the Greek pantheon. It is ok to have an opinion that you do not believe the symbolism is correct but when you question the symbolism try checking several sources that are not by the same scholars or authors as well as from different backgrounds. The point is that symbolism can change depending on the century as well as the author who is writing the mythos or mythology story and translations.
Hey Frank, I hope you are doing well. Think of this way, the centaur is a hybrid, of man and animal. So, think of the place they appear, well they appear at the edge of something, at the place of breakdown. For ex, the border where the rules break down, a place where the animality or fetish and desire rule. And in terms of our own body, the desire and focus on the border would lead to a fetishization of too much sex, that is what the centaur represents. The singular focus on the lower things, or the place where your head is willingly conceding to your lower body or desire. Too much any particulars, like too much water would lead to a flood, when earth takes heaven.
@@vimalpatel4060 I thought maybe it's related to the fact that the centaur is a hybrid so someone had really out of control sexual desire with a horse and the centaur was the result. I'll think about what you're saying.
@@Cyrus_II The centaur pattern or story is about excess amount of sex. But, the desire to have sex with a horse, would manifest itself at the breakdown of a culture or at the border, or before a flood, the first pattern leads to the other(breakdown). Frank, I hope this aids in your thinking. Feel free to ask questions if need be. Peace be with you.
I think people living in a farming culture had a better idea of how a stallion behaves, particularly during rutting season. Work horses were gelded to reduce their aggressiveness. The centaur represented that raw stallion energy
That's only because you've been exposed to immature woke interpretations of fantasy that are made by racists. To think that different species in a fantasy world are actually covert representations of various races is indicative only of racism on the part of the person who makes that interpretation. If a fictional species represents a particular vice, or a particular human insufficiency, and it is represented symbolically in their physiology, there is no logical jump from that to "that's a representation of a race" that isn't based on accepting the stereotypes in the first place.
You're the only one bringing race into this so nice projection but unlike everyone else in this situation I happen to think racism is a meaningless slur used to shut down any White person who might begin to see themselves as part of a distinct group with it's own interests. So as you can imagine I have the utmost contempt for people like you.
Lewis was definitely a genius in his own way but Pageau's criticism is fair. He isn't saying that a centaur had to be sexualized. He is saying that a centaur is half horse, half human, there is symbolism to be extracted from that in many forms: what does it mean to have horse legs? But in Narnia they are just guys with horse legs, there is no symbolism. But there is actually good symbolism in Narnia, it's just that there isn't as much as there could be - like he said.
Well in Narnia IIRC centaurs are repeatedly portrayed as being basically regal, serious creatures. I'm not sure if that lines up with the proper mythology of the centaur, but I wouldn't say in Narnia they're simply guys with horse legs. They absolutely have their own character that is very distinct from the other creatures.
@@jeremyinvictus you're right
No, he is saying that as in real life we use symbolism all the time, the whole world uses symbolism all the time, all cultures, all religions, all art. Then someone creates a fictional world and somehow has not grasped that a world with no symbols is not real, it's just superficial and silly
He based lion the witch and the wardrobe on Jesus crucifixion
Perhaps but this is a children's book
He wrote them for children and was very clear that children were his audience; They were intentionally innocent for his audience. If you imagine he heard portions of Tolkien’s LOTR stories in progress and he escaped into the innocence of his own stories.
I agree with what you're saying but Narnia, in my opinion, is supposed to be a gateway drug of sorts to youngsters so that they can drip their toes into these concepts and not be overwhelmed. The books are not quite as rich as they could be and that's sad for us adults but if it gets kids into this kind of thing than it served a good purpose, as it did indeed in my case.
hmm i don't know, what work for kids can also work for adults too if you know how to layer the story properly and the depth it can bring can be depend on the demographic understanding to interpretative the story
@@somedude9828 I agree with that for sure. There are things I enjoy about Narnia to this day as an adult and funnily enough Lewis wrote that "children's stories which only appeal to children are not good stories" paraphrased. There are plenty more stories out there that have a greater degree of depth and symbolic richness but they are intended for adults, no?
@@47StormShadow yes there is plenty of story out there intended for adults, it's just what that story are actually about and how it unfolded itself from beginning to end is what matter, because a story that are not guided you through it layer of depth of what it is trying to telling to you than it's not a good story in my opinion
From Narnia and Harry Potter, I always saw the centaur inhabit the role of the philosopher. In essence, these centaurs were descended of Chiron as opposed to the standard stock. Lewis in his general mythology believed that the shadows of our myths pointed to greater truths in God's creation. This is such as the friendly and small dragon on Perelandra which is how a dragon on an incorrupt world would appear and behave.
Lewis's creatures were pure
Lewis, from what I understand, liked playing with the idea of a sort of 'baptized paganism'. Like Chesterton and other what I would call Christian romantics, they loved what was good in the old world, so to speak, and wanted to transform it in the new life of the Gospel. He was very intentional about this inn his writings, and if memory serves even Bacchus made an appearance. Puritans, or at least purists seem to be allergic to this kind of literary ecumenism but C.S. Lewis wasn't just randomly playing around. Not that Jonathan suggests this at all, just my two cents!
Right on, I just dropped in but I totally agree! The part about Baccus always stuck out to me as being a bit too pagan for a Christian children's story. But I'll always love CS Lewis. And all the people criticizing him probably did not achieve the kind of popularity that he did. He's one of the most well known authors and for good reason.
Currently reading Narnia to 7 year old and it has had beautiful and profound affect on whole family… I like what someone said about it being a ‘baptized paganism’. When she’s 11-12(?) I look forward to exploring LOR.
Absolutely. re-reading them with my 3yr son has reminded me just how ritualistic and pagan many of the scenes are.
To be fair, Narnia is a fanciful story for kids. Depicting "aggressive, uncontrollable sexual desire" isn't exactly age appropriate.
Read the other comments
Tolkien- schmolkien - he didn’t like Lewis mixing up mythological characters either, but I’m glad it didn’t hold him back. The chronicles are timeless and lovely.
Interesting perspective - as a female, I tend to want to see the satyr in the books as symbolic of how someone can appear nice and harmless, but in reality be hiding a violent intent that won't be revealed until it is too late. Like a wolf in sheep's clothing.
As a woman, I see that too, I think it’s obvious actually. He quite literally lied to Lucy in the beginning and manipulated her into his house under the guise of being her friend, but he secretly was going to kidnap her for the white queen, hence his lullaby he played to put her to sleep. He saw Aslan in the fire and felt guilt for his horrible motives. Not everything needs to be sexual… you can take a trait of something and keep it, but tone it down for general audiences, while still keeping some of that source. A centaur does not always need to be aggressive or sexually charged, neither does a saytr. These books and films were made for children… they’re not going to put a rapist saytr and a horny bull man just because some people take their origin so literally. They’re also not real, they can be whatever we want them to be. He did absolutely fine.
As someone who likes Narnia I agree with this criticism, there is some symbolic discombobulation
"Symbolic Discombobulation" is an excellent, excellent phrase. Definitely storing it for later use.
The part I think Mr. Pageau and many commenters seem to miss is that the fauns and centaurs and so on of Narnia aren't those of the Classical world, but the mythical creatures of the Romantics and neo-Romantics.
They aren't intended to invoke the same sensibilities of the mythical beings of Classical myth but to invoke a sense of Arcadian mystery and fantasy.
I think it’s possible that could have been some type of rebellion against the idea that we can see the character or salvation of a person based on certain qualities. Just a thought
.
if Lewis wrote for . very young kids
.
his mythological resolution
.
may have been . just what was needed
.
.
🕊
This is so wrong. Okay, so he doesn’t use the traditional Greek mythological connotations with these creatures, but he creates his own. The fauns through Mr Tumnus very much came across to me as the friendly, warm, party loving, pleasure seeking guys (kind of like hobbits). The centaurs are 1000% represented as the wiser, stronger beings, with a lot of memory (kind of like the elves in LOTR). And then we have the animals which are there to pad out the demographic for the sake of kids, these are children’s books at the end of the day! It’s also difficult to have you critique someone when you are accusing him of failing to do that which he never claimed to try. It’s like me saying you’re video didn’t talk much about the weather or what Kim Kardashian was wearing last night, when that’s not even the intent of the video in the first place. So I think this guy gotta be careful to not impose his wants from a book and the things HE thinks it should be doing, or the ways in which he thinks it’s lacking because of his own assumption that it’s supposed to serve him personally. I for one saw all the deeper qualities in these creatures. As deep as C.S Lewis wanted it to go. And it may not be as deep as LOTR, but it’s not LOTR, it’s Narnia
Absolutely what I was thinking - centaurs and fauns very much had a character of their own. Especially loved what he did with marshwiggles and unicorn. Also showed the distinct nature of talking horses, giants, and dwarves - both red and black. All characters genius had unique characterisations!
@@nahumkhokhar3441exactly. LOTR is SUPPOSED to be world building and deep and lore-filled. Narnia is supposed to be an enchanting children’s story with metaphors and deeper meanings and symbolism teased and scattered throughout. They do have distinct energies about them as I said, but to criticise Lewis for it not being DEEP ENOUGH when that’s not what he even wanted is silly. It’s like me telling a sad story and someone criticising me for it not being funny… that’s not the intent 🤣
I don't think Johnathan meant it wasn't "deep enough." The idea is that certain figures already have this symbolism built into them because of the already established myths. It's fine that he used them in his own way, but people well versed in myths will see that there is a bit of a disconnect between his version and the pattern they are used to seeing. Maybe Lewis did that on purpose, but it's still there nonetheless.
I don't think Jonathan is articulating something he subjectively wants, he's making a very specific criticism about the overall coherence of the series. Albeit in short form and few words.
I think there were small hints that the parties with the manaeds got a little wild in Narnia. Even at eight or nine, I wanted to get ahold of Nymphs and Their Ways off Mr. Tumnus's bookshelf and read it for myself.
This is exactly why the Lord of the Rings has had so much more cultural impact than the Narnia books. As a side note, and I would love it if Jonathan would explore this in a future video, there is so much Christian symbolism in the Lord of the Rings. For example, the death and resurrection of Gandalf after his battle with the Balrog. The return of Aragon as the true king, but a king who was meek and humble, as opposed to the arrogant house of Stewards who were on the throne of Gondor, who were meant to only be caretakers of the throne.
There is much more …
This is a valid take, but I would argue that Lewis based all his centaurs on Chiron, who was stately, wise, and nothing like the rest of his kin. Fauns are Etruscan and Roman; they look a lot like the Greek satyrs but are distinct from them. While satyrs are lustful and violent, fauns are benign. Tumnus is actually a very accurate faun.
I'd much rather have Lewis' unusually refined centaurs and fauns than cringe like the awkward can-eating goat boy (who actually *is* a satyr, not a faun) and "party ponies" in Percy Jackson. 🤮
Really good take, never though about that before.
If you read Lewis' letters from the devil to his cousin you understand him better, Narnia was made to be popular because his friend was doing well making escapism.
I'm a fantasy game theorist and this is the core to writing mythological cultures. ❤
I think Pageau is too critical of the Narnia books. Though I will agree that Lewis' non-fiction work is superior to his fiction.
The space trilogy was and is, brilliant. In my opinion, of course.
This explains the scene with the Satyr crying 👀
The LOTR is really a lot more about expressing the essence of the mythological things, rather than denuding them in an almost post-industrial way, like Narnia somehow does…😅
I think Lewis was much more taken by the whimsical sensation of exploring a mythology than Tolkien who was trying to emulate the mythologies we see in reality.
Planet Narnia the book convincely dealt with that issue
Though it has been quite some time since I visited Narnia, I think Lewis used the symbolism of centaurs in a way that was appropriate for his targeted audience. The sexual connection would have been difficult to use in books written for children. Instead he connected centaurs to philosophy and a sense of mysterious honor.
That is wonderful Thank you
Hm, cool. CA Lewis’s space trilogy might have done that better.
A series I read as a kid that has characteristics linked to the creature type really well is Redwall
"Judge a persons character off of their physiognomy" - Jonathan Pageau
In fairy tales yes absolutely
Marina is more appropriate for younger children. But grown adults can appreciate it too. Teens would prefer Lord of the Rings.
Pre school teacher
People criticizing fiction tells you everything you need to know about their logic 😅
You didn't have to ruin the image of centaurs like that. I like the centaurs from Narnia. They'r my favorite creatures. 😢😢😢😢
Well, maybe CS Lewis didn’t know or else maybe he knew this was a kids book and he didn’t want to do that. So that’s getting awfully technical if you ask me.
Mr. Tumnus does kidnnap a little girl on Narnia, thats very much a satyr thing to do.
I wouldn't say that..cause as long as they live in narnia and belief in aslan (christian=jesus) and worship him as they King...they are not ruled by their "aggressiv" nature. And then in "Prince Caspian" there is a wild bear who attack Lucy. She ask why the animals can't no longer talk and the dwraft answers, that aslan is gone long ago, the beasts turn wild cause they forgot him, no longer belief in him and forgot who they really are. Which seems to me to be an christian allegory to what happens if you forget that christ lives in you. So i think Lewis create this by purpose and as I know Lewis and Tolkien gets in a discurs cause they show christian themes so differently.
Just my piont of view😅
In other words! Watch the opening scene of the Dark Knight.
I'm almost done listening to all the audiobooks and the series is just okay imo. I had previously only read the first book a long time ago and loved it. I did enjoy it very much this time around but I'd say the rest of the books are mostly just boring.
The main idea was christian theology✝️
Pfft. Narnia isn't here. Centaurs there would necessarily have different qualities. Tolkien wrote about earth. He was bound by different effects of the earthly fall.
That's a good point.
God, I do hate how C.S forced 'is weird ever-changin' views into it.
Bible fanfic I call it.
noooo you need to read Planet Narnia by Micheal Ward
Jadis was the hero trying to save Narnia from the false god Aslan. Aslan was a false god because unless you write God into the story as 100% identical to God IRL, you're writing a false god. If Aslan WAS just how Jesus interracted with the fantasy world of Narnia, He'd need to be a humble Jewish carpenter regardless of whether or not that made sense to a setting where there are no humans, let alone Jewish ones. Same goes for Eru Illuvitar being a false god in Tolkien by not being 1:1 in description to the Bible.
I don't think having centaurs being sex crazed fiends would have worked for books written primarily for children, no matter how profound for all audiences they are.
But Narnia is real (sobs) what don't you understand you are ruining my childhood (sobs again)
Ok on the surface Pageau is right, but dig deeper and see that the mythical creatures still are themselves but are being transfigured. Mr Tumnus for example is a faun who was going to lull his victim asleep with his panpipe, but then felt remorse. The Centaurs in the Caspian are the most violent and warlike of the creatures.
It's a children's book.
Those who know mythology lore know that it was satyrs not centaurs that were sexual it was not until the mid 1900s that centaurs were depicted as sexual. Also using orcs from the lord of the rings fails as an example of correct personification because orcs from myth look like a man with pig features such as a boars tusk shape teeth on the bottom jaw and the nose. The symbolism in Narnia is more accurate than this video can deny. It is literally the symbolism not mentioned in this video that stand more true and accurate such as the correlation between Narnia and the Bible. But saying that Lewis failed in Symbolism while his friend and fellow author Tolkien was more successful is like saying that oxygen is as far from air as water is from fire. Tolkien and Lewis bounced ideas off each other for the books. And they both spent a lot of time researching myth and lore. Traditionally centaurs were violent and war like and that is why the centaur Chiron trained many heroes of the Greek pantheon. It is ok to have an opinion that you do not believe the symbolism is correct but when you question the symbolism try checking several sources that are not by the same scholars or authors as well as from different backgrounds. The point is that symbolism can change depending on the century as well as the author who is writing the mythos or mythology story and translations.
Centaur lives matter
Ok good point.
But specifically, why is a centaur related to sexual desire? I can't link its physical characteristics with what you're describing.
Hey Frank, I hope you are doing well. Think of this way, the centaur is a hybrid, of man and animal. So, think of the place they appear, well they appear at the edge of something, at the place of breakdown. For ex, the border where the rules break down, a place where the animality or fetish and desire rule. And in terms of our own body, the desire and focus on the border would lead to a fetishization of too much sex, that is what the centaur represents. The singular focus on the lower things, or the place where your head is willingly conceding to your lower body or desire. Too much any particulars, like too much water would lead to a flood, when earth takes heaven.
@@vimalpatel4060 I thought maybe it's related to the fact that the centaur is a hybrid so someone had really out of control sexual desire with a horse and the centaur was the result. I'll think about what you're saying.
@@Cyrus_II The centaur pattern or story is about excess amount of sex. But, the desire to have sex with a horse, would manifest itself at the breakdown of a culture or at the border, or before a flood, the first pattern leads to the other(breakdown). Frank, I hope this aids in your thinking. Feel free to ask questions if need be. Peace be with you.
I think people living in a farming culture had a better idea of how a stallion behaves, particularly during rutting season. Work horses were gelded to reduce their aggressiveness. The centaur represented that raw stallion energy
C S Lewis did it much better in The Great Divorce
Which is his finest work if you ask me
Yes because Tolkien elves are little beings with ears bigger than their heads and fart magic dust...
Mas Put….
Just no
Lol
No hate, but you’re sort of saying Tolkien did racism better.
That's only because you've been exposed to immature woke interpretations of fantasy that are made by racists.
To think that different species in a fantasy world are actually covert representations of various races is indicative only of racism on the part of the person who makes that interpretation.
If a fictional species represents a particular vice, or a particular human insufficiency, and it is represented symbolically in their physiology, there is no logical jump from that to "that's a representation of a race" that isn't based on accepting the stereotypes in the first place.
You mad?
No hes not
You're the only one bringing race into this so nice projection but unlike everyone else in this situation I happen to think racism is a meaningless slur used to shut down any White person who might begin to see themselves as part of a distinct group with it's own interests. So as you can imagine I have the utmost contempt for people like you.
As someone who has studied Tolkien extensively for 15 years, this has got to be one of the most ignorant takes I've heard