Earlier this week I witnessed a swearing-in ceremony in which several hundred immigrants became citizens of the United States of America. During the proceedings I took note of postures, gestures and words. The new citizens were asked to stand, to raise the right hand and to recite the oath of citizenship. Later, all of us, new citizens and observers alike, stood with hands over hearts to recite the Pledge of Allegiance. We all stood attentively, facing the flag, as we sang the national anthem.
As I observed all of this, it dawned on me that the oldest branches of Christianity observe a similar protocol. We kneel to confess our sins. We stand to affirm our allegiance to God the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Near the end of the creed we make the sign of the cross as a visible confession of our faith in Christ whose death on the cross made it possible for us to receive eternal life. Indeed, there are postures, gestures and words for us to use throughout the liturgy.
The worship settings I participated in most of my life fostered worship that is word-oriented. That was fine as far as it went, but worship lacked a full-body response. We stood from time to time, mostly to sing hymns; but standing and sitting never seemed purposeful. Now that I worship in the Anglican tradition I understand that rising, sitting, kneeling, extending a gesture of peace and making the sign of the cross are done for a reason. They give reading, singing and listening greater meaning.
I am thankful that we used appropriate postures, gestures and words a few days ago as the new citizens were sworn in. I am even more thankful that my fellow followers of Jesus Christ use appropriate postures, gestures and words as we worship the true and living God. That full-body worship helps me, as the Apostle Paul expressed it, present my body as a living sacrifice to God. May it continue forever.
Saturday, June 11, 2011
Tuesday, June 7, 2011
Friday, June 3, 2011
Which Order?
Questions often arise regarding the reading-order for the Chronicles of Narnia. When I present seminars on the subject, I always urge people to read the stories in their original order—especially if they are reading them for the first time. Yet current editions typically come with a 1 on the spine of The Magician’s Nephew and a 2 on the spine of The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, so first-time readers naturally take them in that sequence. I believe they will have a much better experience if they read them in their original order. Let’s consider the facts.
The Chronicles were originally published as The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe (1950), Prince Caspian (1951), The Voyage of the ‘Dawn Treader’ (1952), The Silver Chair (1953), The Horse and His Boy (1954), The Magician’s Nephew (1955), The Last Battle (1956).
In 1985 the sequence was changed to The Magician’s Nephew, The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, The Horse and His Boy, Prince Caspian, The Voyage of the ‘Dawn Trader’, The Silver Chair, The Last Battle.
Why the change? Alan Jacobs explains that, in letters to children and in conversation at the end of his life with his executor-to-be Walter Hooper, Lewis said that he preferred the chronological order. As a result, in 1985 the publisher rearranged the sequence.[1] Jacobs gives us a wonderful short argument for keeping the original order.[2] I consider his explanation to be the best short expression of the perspective I embrace. In the following summary I combine Jacobs’s explanation with some thoughts of my own.
1. Since the stories are self-contained they can be read in any order.
2. Yet I would never recommend reading The Last Battle before any of the others.
3. There is a so-called “Caspian Trilogy” that should be read consecutively. The trilogy conveys Caspian’s life from youth to old age. The second two stories show Eustace Scrubb’s spiritual progress. There is no reason to read them in reverse order.
4. HB should be read after LWW since it takes place during LWW.
5. Therefore the dispute comes down to one question: Should the sequence begin with LWW or with MN?[3]
6. The argument for MN is simple: It describes the creation of Narnia; so placing it at the beginning of the series replicates the Genesis-to-Revelation pattern of the Bible.[4] It also gives a nice chronological sequence to the stories.
7. The case for LWW is more complex and much stronger. Though Lewis spoke of altering the order of the books, he also spoke of needing to revise the books in order to remove inconsistencies. Placing MN first increases the number of inconsistencies.
a. We are told at the end of the LWW that this story is ‘the beginning of the adventures of Narnia’.[5]
b. The narrator tells readers that the children in LWW do not know who Aslan is ‘any more than you do’;[6] but readers know who Aslan is if they have already read MN.[7]
c. Much of the suspense in the early chapters of LWW comes from our inability to understand what is happening in the magical wardrobe. But if we have already read MN we will know all about the wardrobe, so that part of the story loses its punch.[8]
d. One of the delights of LWW is the inexplicable presence of a lamppost in the midst of a forest. It’s a very familiar object from our world standing curiously in the midst of an utterly different world. One of the delights of MN is the unexpected discovery of how that lamppost got there.[9]
e. At least six additional questions offer a sense of wonder for first-time readers of LWW.
Who is the professor?
How did the White Witch get into Narnia?
How was Narnia created?
How did the White Witch get so white?
Why was the professor not surprised by the differences in time between the two worlds?
How did the professor get his large house?
All six questions are answered in MN, so a huge “spoiler alert” should be given to a first-time reader who begins with MN.
8. Jacobs concludes his discussion by expressing that if Lewis really thought that the series should begin with The Magician’s Nephew, he was simply mistaken. The original order of publication is the best way for readers to explore Narnia.[10]
[1] Robert MacSwain and Michael Ward, Eds., The Cambridge Companion to C. S. Lewis (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010), 270.
[2] Jacobs, 269-271.
[3] Jacobs, 270.
[4] Jacobs, 270.
[5] Jacobs, 270-271. The quote is from very last sentence of LWW.
[6] LWW chapter 7
[7] Jacobs, 271.
[8] Jacobs, 271.
[9] Jacobs, 271.
[10] Jacobs, 271.
The Chronicles were originally published as The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe (1950), Prince Caspian (1951), The Voyage of the ‘Dawn Treader’ (1952), The Silver Chair (1953), The Horse and His Boy (1954), The Magician’s Nephew (1955), The Last Battle (1956).
In 1985 the sequence was changed to The Magician’s Nephew, The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, The Horse and His Boy, Prince Caspian, The Voyage of the ‘Dawn Trader’, The Silver Chair, The Last Battle.
Why the change? Alan Jacobs explains that, in letters to children and in conversation at the end of his life with his executor-to-be Walter Hooper, Lewis said that he preferred the chronological order. As a result, in 1985 the publisher rearranged the sequence.[1] Jacobs gives us a wonderful short argument for keeping the original order.[2] I consider his explanation to be the best short expression of the perspective I embrace. In the following summary I combine Jacobs’s explanation with some thoughts of my own.
1. Since the stories are self-contained they can be read in any order.
2. Yet I would never recommend reading The Last Battle before any of the others.
3. There is a so-called “Caspian Trilogy” that should be read consecutively. The trilogy conveys Caspian’s life from youth to old age. The second two stories show Eustace Scrubb’s spiritual progress. There is no reason to read them in reverse order.
4. HB should be read after LWW since it takes place during LWW.
5. Therefore the dispute comes down to one question: Should the sequence begin with LWW or with MN?[3]
6. The argument for MN is simple: It describes the creation of Narnia; so placing it at the beginning of the series replicates the Genesis-to-Revelation pattern of the Bible.[4] It also gives a nice chronological sequence to the stories.
7. The case for LWW is more complex and much stronger. Though Lewis spoke of altering the order of the books, he also spoke of needing to revise the books in order to remove inconsistencies. Placing MN first increases the number of inconsistencies.
a. We are told at the end of the LWW that this story is ‘the beginning of the adventures of Narnia’.[5]
b. The narrator tells readers that the children in LWW do not know who Aslan is ‘any more than you do’;[6] but readers know who Aslan is if they have already read MN.[7]
c. Much of the suspense in the early chapters of LWW comes from our inability to understand what is happening in the magical wardrobe. But if we have already read MN we will know all about the wardrobe, so that part of the story loses its punch.[8]
d. One of the delights of LWW is the inexplicable presence of a lamppost in the midst of a forest. It’s a very familiar object from our world standing curiously in the midst of an utterly different world. One of the delights of MN is the unexpected discovery of how that lamppost got there.[9]
e. At least six additional questions offer a sense of wonder for first-time readers of LWW.
Who is the professor?
How did the White Witch get into Narnia?
How was Narnia created?
How did the White Witch get so white?
Why was the professor not surprised by the differences in time between the two worlds?
How did the professor get his large house?
All six questions are answered in MN, so a huge “spoiler alert” should be given to a first-time reader who begins with MN.
8. Jacobs concludes his discussion by expressing that if Lewis really thought that the series should begin with The Magician’s Nephew, he was simply mistaken. The original order of publication is the best way for readers to explore Narnia.[10]
[1] Robert MacSwain and Michael Ward, Eds., The Cambridge Companion to C. S. Lewis (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010), 270.
[2] Jacobs, 269-271.
[3] Jacobs, 270.
[4] Jacobs, 270.
[5] Jacobs, 270-271. The quote is from very last sentence of LWW.
[6] LWW chapter 7
[7] Jacobs, 271.
[8] Jacobs, 271.
[9] Jacobs, 271.
[10] Jacobs, 271.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)