Into the Wardrobe

I’m reading She by Rider Haggard, who is an author that Lewis mentions enjoying. When I got to the part where the hero is ushered into She-who-must-be-obeyed’s presence, I was struck by the similarities between She and the Witch in The Silver Chair.

The beginning of the description of She tells of her snake-like litheness and movements, which of course brings to mind the Witch’s alter ego of the snake. They are both very beautiful, with musical voices – the word “silver” is used to describe the laugh of both. Both are extremely long-lived. Both are evil. Both are associated with humans or human-like creatures (i.e. the giants in TSC) who eat humans. And both live underground.

It’s interesting, too, that both are described as being dressed in a kirtle – green for the Witch, and white for She. I first saw this word in TSC, and have never seen or heard it since, until I read She. (But then, maybe I haven’t read enough of the “right” books, where people go about all the time dressed in kirtles.)

When was that title written. I don't believe I've heard of She. Sounds interesting. I gather it's Fantasy.

She? It's extraordiary! First published in 1886-7 in serial form, written by Henry Rider Haggard, it's one of the few books that Tolkien admitted influnced him, albeit slightly - though it's most un-Tolkienish. "She" ("who-must-be-obeyed") is the (immortal) ruler of a hidden African kingdom, discovered by two Englishmen, one of whom is the reincarnation of her lover from Ancient Egypt. In 1965 it was made into a film by Hammer Film productions, with Ursula Andress as "She".

She is great, though I probably would never had read it had it not been for Lewis's praise of Haggard in several places.

I always thought "She" was a source for Jadis, however, not the Lady of the Green Kirtle. On the other hand, if the latter is of the same sort of the former, they may both be derived from Ayesha.

One of Lewis' reference to She (or one of the Rider Haggard books) was also an example of Lewis talking about what he didn't like in movie adaptations of books -- pretty much the sort of thing many of us complain about in the LotR and Narnia movies actually. He talks somewhere about how the movie opted to avoid the ominous ending of the book in favour of a more "cinematic" hollywood flourish -- not his words exactly, but along that line. Perhaps Sven can locate the reference? (it might be in "Of Other Worlds", but I'm not sure and can't look it up right now.)

--Stanley

Hmm. I want to find and read She now.

And that line about the "completely irrelevant young woman in shorts" makes me smile every time I read it. It's so true...

Thanks Sven. Lewis makes great points and about which I complain of most movies today. The only thing I would disagree with Lewis here (and even then it is not really disagreement since Lewis only says "if this is true" and not that it "is" true), is the idea that perhaps the type of ending Lewis likes is not cinematic enough for a film and that IF that is true, then maybe the book should not be filmed if a significant part of the book's appeal has to be removed. My contention is that such an ending as Lewis prefers IS cinematically possible and potentially aestheically pleasing in the visual film medium, contrary to all the modern sentiments about how films "must" be done and this current pandering insistence on a certain kind of "pacing" (how I have come to hate the overuse and miuse of those two words "cinematic" and "pacing" by mediocre-bound minded directors these days!).

That ominous sense of doom can be quite effectively done on screen if a director is simply skilled and intelligent and courageous enough to attempt it. Unfortunately most can only succumb to the modern lowest common denominator demands of action and explosions and car crashes and MTV-video-mindset scene cuts every 1.4 seconds

ok, deep breaths, Stanley, calm deep breaths,
--Stanley

LOL


That makes a good deal more sense than the keyester girfriend line... it could actually be quite literally true!