Thread: narnia vs. middle earth?
as for myself... i prefere tolkien's work simply because it has a depth that narnia didn't achieve. they are both classic masterpieces of thier time. narnia is well written but it cannot compare to LotR, Sil, the Hobbit in style. just my 2cents.
I like them both, but were I to be abandoned on a desert isle with only one set or the other as my companion, I would choose LotR.
hey are two different styles of fantasy: The Lord of the Rings is a classic epic adventure written for grownups, that some children can also enjoy, while The Chronicles of Narnia is a series of allegorical stories written for children, which some grownups can also enjoy.
They are two different styles of fantasy: The Lord of the Rings is a classic epic adventure written for grownups, that some children can also enjoy, while The Chronicles of Narnia is a series of allegorical stories written for children, which some grownups can also enjoy
Not allegorical... I think I have his quote about that inTolkien and CS Lewis ... but anyway, yes, they are totally different... I find Narnia easier to read all the way through, but Tolkien is definitely more complex
(Grondy, has anybody every called you Grendy? I've seen Grandy, Grindy, Grundy, and Grondy, but not Grendy.)
I enjoyed reading C.S Lewis when I was younger, and I tried to read LoTR but
couldnt get into it being as young as I was, I started reading Tolkien a few
years ago now, and I enjoy the depth of it.
How can you ask me to choose? I love them both--
and am grateful for both Lewis & Tolkien's ability & will to
Doubtless we know more of ME than of Narnia; Lewis only
chronicles the experiences of children of our world in that one,
whereas ME is full of adult experiences of all kinds, and is
furthermore a myth of "our" own world, and not of another world
entirely. Equally doubtless (in my mind) is the idea that,
were I to travel back to Tolkien's mythological time on this
world, or were I to be called into Narnia's past by Aslan, I
would find myself surrounded in either case by a living breathing
environment full of wonders and details and history and people
of complex and of simple character --just as I am surrounded by
such realism and breathless beauty in this world.
What do you think are the merits (or drawbacks) of having, say,
either Aslan, or Gandalf, as your mentor/powerful ally/friend?
have read so...
Well the English culture, as much of European culture includes of course wine and spirits. JRR loved his wines at least as shown in the letters. But I sometimes got the impression it came from the effect of the wine in overcoming feelings of hunger for pricier foods and to comfort for all the things he and Edith went through and the horrible memories of the past more than just a taste for alcohol. As for Jack, I cannot say. I know that when the children were in the house of the Beavers, the children were given milk of some sort and Mr. Beaver stuck to his beer.
I have to agree with dear Cloveress, I would rather wake up to find myself in Narnia. More innocent , though the enemy was still cruel. But in Middle-Earth, the cruelty is beyond vicious and no different to my mind than finding myself with the fear of having to avoid nazis or anyone bent on ethnic cleansing. Saroman's prediction that the world of man was over sent shivers down my spine. No, in this instance at any rate give me Narnia.
If your question is "which one would you like to live in?" then the answer might be Narnia, for the reasons that have been previously underlined by others in this thread.
But if the question is "which one do you prefer" from a literary standpoint, then Middle Earth is certainly the answer for me. Simply for the fact that I don't like the idea that Narnia is just... heaven. (I hope everybody here has read all the books, otherwise I've spoiled everything - sorry). If I'm not wrong, JRRT himself said that Middle Earth is just our world, observed from a different point of view. That's why we find good and bad in it, because that's what we find in our everyday life. Narnia instead HAS to be as joyful and merry as it is described by Lewis (that means, very far from OUR reality), because if not so, how could Lewis (being so religious after his conversion) give to us all a "bad" idea of what is awaiting us after we die?
I hope you get what I mean.
But Laura, that is just the treatment used by Jack. A writer has a right to tell his or her tale in whatever setting and context preferred. I like both approaches, JRR' suited his sub world and Jack (Clive Staples Lewis) was perfect for the world he created. I honestly don't believe comparison's are that helpful. Just as everyone has a unique set of fingerprints, so too an author has a unique way of expressing his or her self. Tolkien spent fifteen years or so, Jack did not, so right there you will have a vast difference. John Reul helped bring Jack to the Catholic faith, so there was even ground between the two. John Ruel used his whole sub world as a canvass if you will to showcase the languages that he worked hard on and was proud of; Jack said he wrote the Narnia tales for children to teach them about God and to learn good manners. So if one does not believe in God then perhaps reading the tales won't be that great an experience. I like the relatively gentle atmosphere of Narnia better than middle earth which is always bleak and hopeless in a way before the crowning of The King, but I love the majesty and grandeur and military strategies and the languages of Middle Earth.
I have to disagree with the statement that Narnia "is" heaven.
Rather, when you read the bit at the end of The Last Battle that describes Heaven, it's very clear that Heaven, while not equivalent to Narnia, does contain "the original" or "the real version" of which Narnia was an imprint or a copy or a shadow or a reflection. It's also very clear that Heaven also contains the "real version" of every other place, even though England is the only other specifically mentioned place.
I agree with Elanorraine.