Children Wielding Swords!

[Spare Oom]

One thing that has really bothered me ever since I first read the Narnia books is that the children are handed weapons and told it is their duty to fight. Last night I re-read Prince Caspian and winced at the following: "Peter swung to face Sopespian, slashed his legs from under him and, with the back-cut of the same stroke, walloped off his head." Eek! Fighting mythological creatures is one thing, and I find I can distance myself from that a bit more, but killing human beings is another. Wouldn't Peter and the others be traumatised by all this? What would have happened if they had simply refused to become involved in all the fighting and violence going on in Narnia? (I know they were the four kings and queens mentioned in a prophecy, but surely they weren't just puppets in that prophecy - they still had free will.) Just wondering whether anyone else found all this disturbing?

[A#minor]

[nomad]

I sort of agree with A#minor. But I'm not naive enough to think that I would not be traumatized by the act of killing someone, even if I thought it was totally justified and necessary. This is why I really liked that small moment in the film where Peter is distracted in the train station, staring at the young soldiers in uniform. He is only a couple years away from that and the truth is that children do fight in war. You can just see Peter wondering if he will be wearing a uniform soon, and part of him wishing he was old enough now. That's a good point about the children having experience of war already - in a way it would be a relief to feel that in Narnia they could actually join the fight instead of standing by helplessly like they have to back home. I don't think the children could have walked away from the violence once they had met Aslan and understood what was at stake. But there's a reason most WWII veterans, whatever their age at the time, didn't talk much about the war.

[Warrior 4 Jesus]

Yes, there is a difference between killing for the sake of it and killing to protect the ones you love. Also like A# minor God calls us to fight sometimes and this is part of being in God's army. But in that sense it's more a spiritual battle than a physical battle, but the same thing applies.

Not to mention God made males to grow up and be protectors, providers and warriors for their families. That's why kid's like to play swordfights and all that - we were designed by God to have a spirit for adventure.

[Summer]

[wood-maid]

[Alan]

[Theo]

[King Edmund]

If I had to I would, like A#minor wrote "Kill or be Killed." Sure, I'd be a little stunned at first. But, if there is a battle that I'm asked to fight in and everybody looked to me to be the King like Peter and Edmund were. I would eventually have to do this. Probably wouldn't make me very happy, but duty is duty. I know for a fact that my mind has not changed on this subject no matter what my age is. If I were 14, I'd still do it if it was necessary and I know that I would have thought the same thing at that age.

[A#minor]

[Spare Oom]

Theo: I can agree Lewis' attitude to violence can seem somewhat contradictory occasionally, particularly when the fight scenes feature kids. (Considering they wouldn't even show any blood in the LWW movie, I wonder if we'll see the kids killing grown men in Prince Caspian?) I think part of it stems from the medieval romances that were one of his inspirations; they were set (and written) in a world where fighting and violent death was ever-present and taken for granted in a wholly different way than for most of us today.

Yes, I think the fact that Lewis was inspired by the medieval romances explains a lot.


Summer: Plus, while the children were in Narnia, especially after LWW, they were remembering their adult lives there, and acting accordingly.

That's a good point too, and would apply to all the books after LWW.

Thanks

[A#minor]

[Theo]

[A#minor]

[Bill]