Talk:The Chronicles of Narnia

There is a hidden note in the criticism section indicating that the section has been discussed at length on the talk page. I don't see that discussion anywhere. Has it been archived? Can anyone point me to its location? Thank you. SunCrow (talk) 17:01, 3 April 2019 (UTC) [reply ]

Did you check the four archives? Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:09, 3 April 2019 (UTC) [reply ]

The criticism section is far too long. I also question the notability of the entire "Accusations of gender stereotyping" sub-section. It appears to fail WP:Fringe and WP:Undue, given that it contains extremist terminology like "gender stereotypes" to describe the ordinary behavior of adolescent girls, and it gives undue credence and weight to the fringe view that gender norms/roles are somehow bad, even though the vast majority of people in the world regard gender norms as a good thing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chideegwen (talk • contribs) 15:54, 6 December 2019 (UTC) [reply ]

It's one thing to disagree with a piece of feminist criticism, but the idea that the term "gender stereotypes" is "extremist terminology" reveals you don't have much contact with the world of literary criticism these days. I can assure you critiques of Lewis's ideas about gender in general are not few, and it shouldn't be surprising to find some attaching to the Chronicles. —VeryRarelyStable (talk) 22:03, 6 December 2019 (UTC) [reply ]

(削除) gender stereotypes were invented sometime in the 2000's to 2010's. before that, gender was a genetic thing. The film and books are not based on futurists. they are based on an old book. should they be whitewashed? Are you trying to change history? (削除ここまで) Autumn Wind (talk) 09:35, 1 August 2022 (UTC) [reply ]

There are so many confusions packed into this comment that I'm not going to bother untangling them. —VeryRarelyStable 12:35, 1 August 2022 (UTC) [reply ]

I was going to delete my stupid rant but I don't know if that would be rude/proper. Autumn Wind (talk) 21:56, 7 August 2022 (UTC) [reply ]

A fellow named Michael Ward believes he has uncovered a one-to-one mapping between the Narnia books and the classical/renaissance mythology of the planets (PhD thesis, published as "Planet Narnia: The Seven Heavens in the Imagination of C. S. Lewis "). Among many other persuasive ideas, this would anchor the book-order to the originally published order (beginning with The Lion, Ward’s "Jove").

Tying Narnia to Lewis’s life-long immersion in Renaissance literature is, of course, a bonus. Jackrepenning (talk) 00:23, 12 April 2020 (UTC) [reply ]

There's already a Planet Narnia subsection in the article; if you think it needs to be expanded, feel most free. —VeryRarelyStable 01:29, 12 April 2020 (UTC) [reply ]

Given that there's essentially no evidence that Lewis employed such imagery intentionally, the section on Planet Narnia already borders on WP:UNDUE. It's a nice idea, and Lewis would have liked it, but the theory is basically built from whole cloth. (Not to mention that Lewis evidently thought about starting an 8th book.) -- Elphion (talk) 18:43, 12 April 2020 (UTC) [reply ]

I would dispute the claim that there's "no evidence"; Planet Narnia itself marshals a considerable amount of evidence. I don't agree with everything Ward says but I am persuaded of his central thesis. I can even point to one or two things Ward himself doesn't notice but which support said thesis (such as Odinic resonances in The Horse and His Boy) – obviously I can't put such points in the article, because that would be WP:OR. If any other scholar has followed up Ward's ideas, then an expansion would be in order. If not, then I guess the existing subsection probably covers as much as there's warrant for by Wikipedia standards of notability. —VeryRarelyStable 01:38, 13 April 2020 (UTC) [reply ]

So, every time I try to include the a reference to "Further Up, Further In" by the Waterboys, someone deletes it. Here is the most recent version that you deleted :

The song "Further Up, Further In" from the album Room to Roam by Scottish-Irish folk-rock band The Waterboys is heavily influenced by The Chronicles of Narnia , with the title coming from a passage in The Last Battle . C. S. Lewis is acknowledged in the liner notes as an influence.

The reason you gave was "Odd Linking." I don't know if you meant "discuss on Talk" here or on the page for The Chronicles of Narnia. I see now that the song "Further Up, Further In" does not have its own Wikipedia entry; I thought it did. The other links resolve so far as I can tell. I do not know how to cite the liner notes of a CD. (Actually, my earlier attempts to use the citation generation tools even for conventional books and journals have resulted in disaster.) The Wikipedia entry for Room to Roam does acknowledge C.S. Lewis as the source of the song title, and no, I did not write that entry.

I suppose it is improper to link to The Chronicles of Narnia within that article, and C.S. Lewis will have already been linked previously by this point. So, if I change the entry to the following, will you allow it to stand?

The song "Further Up, Further In" from the album Room to Roam by Scottish-Irish folk-rock band The Waterboys is heavily influenced by The Chronicles of Narnia. The title is taken from a passage in The Last Battle , and one verse of the song describes sailing to the end of the world to meet a king, similar to the ending of Voyage of the Dawn Treader . C. S. Lewis is explicitly acknowledged as an influence in the liner notes of the 1990 compact disc.

Pciszek (talk) 21:08, 24 April 2020 (UTC) [reply ]

Thanks. My talk page says to talk on the talk page of the article in question, so I've moved this here. The linking looks good now and the copy is much more clear.

There are other works that are based on elements of the Chronicles. The Roar of Love is based on the first book, and there are other works. I'm not sure we want a WP:COATRACK of all works that are based on, quote from, or allude to one of the books, but I'll open if for discussion. Walter Görlitz (talk) 03:10, 25 April 2020 (UTC) [reply ]

I would suggest that having the Narnia reference on the Room to Roam article is fine if displayed within the appropriate section. However, I would refrain from adding such cultural references to the The Chronicles of Narnia article unless it is of actual significance, rather than "based on, quote from, or allude to" as Walter Görlitz mentioned (WP:HTRIVIA). — Christopher, Sheridan, OR (talk) 04:24, 18 April 2021 (UTC) [reply ]

I have checked the Talk page archive, but could not find a reason for why in § Reading order, the Earth internal chronology for The Horse and His Boy is bracketed (though I could have missed it). I'm sure there's a reason why only this year is bracketed, but it is not obvious in the text as to why this article displays it as [1940]. Perhaps adding hidden text to the article would be a good place to explain this, if not in the visible article itself.

Is it because the four Pevensie children as a group, have not yet stumbled back out of the wardrobe, and so their frame of reference to Earth remains fixed to when they first entered Narnia as a group? — Christopher, Sheridan, OR (talk) 16:34, 17 April 2021 (UTC) [reply ]

I suspect, rather, that the brackets reflect that the time frame in England is not mentioned in the book, since, unlike the others, the book takes place entirely in the Narnian world with no reference to events in our world. -- Elphion (talk) 03:14, 18 April 2021 (UTC) [reply ]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Narnian.world.map.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:38, 27 January 2023 (UTC) [reply ]

Major spoiler in the description of the article! I was looking forward to reading the series but thank you now I know Narnia is destroyed in the last book? 166.181.81.251 (talk) 12:29, 25 October 2023 (UTC) [reply ]

Perhaps you should fully read a book or book series before examining its Wikipedia article. If it's any consolation (and here's another spoiler—read further at your own risk), it was never truly Narnia anyway. pillow crow 17:07, 25 October 2023 (UTC) [reply ]