The Narnia books - oh my goodness

[BellaBear]

I've just read the whole set of them and I am shocked at how racist they are - and also I never realised what a blatant christian analogy they are.

Anyone have any thoughts?

Is it acceptable as they are of their time?

The language is also hilarious (eg a Calormene (pretty obvioulsy meant to be Turkish) using the expression 'He's a brick' in praise of someone made me laugh out loud)

I would let DS read both Narnia and HDM (which DH and I have both read recently) but think at 7 he is probably a bit young for HDM yet. He is currently reading that bastion of political correctness - The Secret Seven.

I read them inside out as a kid and never took on any racist meaning, the christian analogy obviously passed me by totally as well. I am a committed atheist, liberal (complete with bleeding heart) and pinko.
ds1 read them from age 5 and up, he is more of a god denier than me and more astutely liberal as a 14 yr old than I ever was. Part of a broadly balanced reading mix and no harm is done imho. Counterbalanced in our case with lashings of harry potter and monty python. And as age grew the odd viz magazine

im impresed you had a boy who read atall piffle

my ds is 20 and i can guarantee he has never read a book

prolific reader zippi from v young

My Secret Seven reader is shaping up to be quite prolific also. So it should only form a part of his reading matter if I actually get round to purchasing them - have today sent DH to shop for yet another Astrosaurs book (yawn but at least he reads them to himself) and Little Miss Twins (yawn again but at least DH likes reading them to her and it is his turn tonight) as DD finished her reward chart finally.

I have to say though that at 14 I was not very liberal. I have become much more liberal with age - which is unusual I suppose. It took me until I watched the first film to realise why I go TLTWTW as a Sunday school prize though so probably not very astute either.

I got arrested... Well hauled put into handcuffs and loaded into police wagon with other protesters during the springbok rugby tour of nz of 1981. That would make me 11 at the time
and did march for the homsexual law reform bill in nz in 1986 too. Also an anti rape women reclaim the streets march in the early 1980's and the CND anti nuke demos against the us in 1983. My mum was a bra burning husband leaving feminist, hence my entry to activism!
I am actually quite conservative now in comparison!
and ds1 is infact, a lightweight wannabe liberal!

"great (pre 1960) children's books that celebrate difference, independence and tolerance
EH Nesbit
Noel Steatfeild
Just william stories
Gerald Durrell
Dr Suess"

Some of my favourite authors there but E Nesbitt and Noel Streatfield do have racist and classist undercurrents. All that Genteel British Poverty. The Fossil girls - too "poor" to go to school? As if there were no state schools in London in the 1930s. And yet they had servants (albeit worthy retainers who didn't claim their full salaries). The Treasure Seekers are similarly too poor to go to school but not too poor to have servants. You might not find that as repulsive as CS Lewis's racism, but there's a lot of very subtle messaages about class and race and imperialism in those books. Much as I love them, I don't think they are always giving a message I'd be proud for my children to pick up.

Gerald Durrell, maybe. I only vaguely remember the Talking Parcel, I don't think I could accurately critique it from my memory.

Just William. I'd have to look but I suspect there are rather racist classist etc elements in there.

Dr Seuss. Different sort of book. Doesn't compare. Too hard to tell whether a Wocket is being socially snubbed by a Foxinsox, etc.

Just William definitely has the classist element you get in Enid Blyton or Noel Streatfield or whatever.

It's hard to decide what to do about children's books that you loved yourself but think are a bit undesirable, for any reason. I think my nieces have been encouraged to read Little Women, but have had the existence of Good Wives and the other sequels kept from them - if they find it themselves, that's another matter.

I read Narnia aged 11, I guess quite late, and I think that is an absolutely prime age for massive religiosity, perhaps because it is a prime age for realising about the reality of external threats and dangers? (not much psychological knowledge here). I developed a weird religious mix whereby I prayed both to Jesus and Aslan (for help to stop masturbating, usually . I think I just thought it was a coincidence that they both died and came back to life - not too bright. It is all a very specific view of life, but maybe that's true of all authors children like?

I suppose what i meant is that all these authors celebrate aspects of childhood and/or growing up that the Narnia books want children to repress

I would suggest that nearly all books for children or adults written before about the last 40 years have these elements we probably wouldn't accept in something written now. But part of learning to read widely is learning about the context and the ways people thought in different times and places.

Even young children can manage that. My 6yo is very interested in E Nesbitt. With my 8 and 6yo we've also read Little women (they didn't understand that, too young), Anne of Green Gables, A little Princess, and all sorts of old classics which one could critique quite easily. But my 6yo is capable of wondering about these things too, she notes the different language and behaviour and attitudes. I think it's partly why she's so interested in some of these old books even when she finds them difficult to understand.

I am not too keen on my children reading explicitly religious books but my dd1 (8) is rather too keen on a book of Bible Stories she was given. She loves it. I don't stop her reading it. Though I don't like many of the messages it's giving at all. but we discuss it. the theology and ethics of Noah and the Flood, for instance.

How about Roald Dahl whose central characters - all white you will notice - are children whose parents have died and the children are being brought up in abusive circumstances.

Ok, they do have happy endings. But if you analyse any book you will find whatever undertone it is you are looking for I am sure. dd has asked more questions concerning the Roald Dahl books than she has about the Narnia books and there have been times during the Dahl books, The Witches for instance, that I've edited hugely because I felt parts were just too inappropriate and bloody terrifying for her!

If you don't like a certain book then you don't read it. Simple as. But at times I think we are guilty of reading too much into things and are terrified of our children being "brainwashed", yet we are happy to let our children on the pc, use mobile phones, and read trashy books that go on about hair, fashion and make-up that I mentioned previously. In fact today's society is much more sexist than 50 years ago because at least then it was blatant sexism, whereas today much of it is subliminal. Little girls are meant to be girly girls and play with barbies, do their hair and wear totally inappropriate clothes that have things like "sexy babe" on them - not to mention the thongs aimed at young girls.

Narnia is feminist compared to today's society.

I don't see why you are assuming that parents who have concerns about reading Narnia and other dated books don't have concerns about modern reading matter too. I check all the books I buy for my two (mostly I have to admit because I really enjoy reading well written children's books) and certainly those I read aloud to them. They don't have mobiles and I check the cites they use on the internet. I suspect most of the other posters on this thread do to. And there have been plenty of threads about the horribly inappropriate clothes available for both boys and girls. A good mix and conversations about values help too. (But I still wouldn't let Enid Blyton in the house!)

I do consider very carefully what my children read (whatever era it comes from) and what they watch and access via the Internet. I have no problem with them dealing with dark and difficult themes - that's partly what reading is for, to experience other lives and circumstances.

My problem with Narnia is that was written as propaganda. They are considered the archetypal children's books - but they are really no more than evangelizing tracts - and worse, they evangelize by stealth!

It's a bit like those beach missions that play really interesting games, encourage children to join in, then do the "God" talk.

But seeker, most parents who buy the Narnia books know that and therefore are making that choice for their children.

I read Narnia to dd every night, I know the religious theme behind it, I also read her the Bible. I make a choice to introduce my child to these topics. As I said before, if you don't like it you don't read it. I doubt there's an adult alive who doesn't now know the religious connotations of Narnia, and if there is, what's the harm? Most Christian principles are of humility, justice, fairness, friendship, wisdom, love and so on, which this book promotes. If you're an athiest then the books provide good grounding for a moral lifestyle.

It's like reading Bible stories to children as just that, stories. I know many athiests who do this. They don't believe their children are going to convert just by reading a story.

Message withdrawn

Haven't got to the stage where DS is reading on his own, but I am v uncomfortable with the idea of editing books - why not just explain why some bits are in there? They have to deal with racism, sexism and general nastiness in the real worls, surely dealing with it in books is a safe way of thinking about these things?

this is interesting when i was 7 plus i chose my own books...and was very anti any my mum suggested..

we went to the library and she sometimes used to say this is one diana (my 6 years older sister) liked and because i was conttrary and stubborn i used to think well i'm not having that then..she seemed to like polyanna and anne of green gables books i have not read to this day

i can't imasgine how my mum would have kept books from me short of locking me up

if i liked a book by an author i would go back and find the rest

i also used to buy my own books on a saturday morning in smiths...

i discovered for myself new authorsa like alan garner...my mum certasinly never read his books

and out of my three kids only dd1 is a keen reader and she chose her own books too...i never censored them...she read all those babysitters books buty also clasics like swallows and amazons

we dont have the same taste now she seems to like grisham lee childs stuff

i cant imagine censoring kids reading which seems to be a popular idea on mn

and lots of parents are v disapproving of books like Jaq Wilson - why??? Do we only only nice fluffy books with rock solid liberal principles

but then controlling kids behaviour seems a bit of a theme these days

either too much or too little and letting them "run wild"

this is definitely the bit where i part compsny with modern parenting....when people talk about how much they exert influence over their kids choices in everything

if you cant even choose a book and be allowwed to read the whole thing inpeace i think that is very restricting sand weird

Lemony Snicket and Harry Potter are full of similar child neglect and abuse themes. I think children just enjoy it. (Mine love books where children are smacked - they still giggle at the memory of Topsy and Tim running away and getting their breeches dusted. They used to play out that scenario endlessly.)

I can't actually think of any book I've censored yet for my dds. though I don't go out and buy them rainbow fairy or magic kitten or secret unicorn, and they haven't read many of those type. But short of porn or teenage horror stories, I'd let them read most things.

EffiePerine, I'd agree, coming across these attitudes in books is a good way of thinking and talking about them. Also it's enjoyable - I love discussing these issues with my dds when they read a book which surprises or confuses them. It's one of my favourite bits of parenting so far.

Fennel, I agree that it can be really helpful discussing things in books - although I do remember blanching when my 6 yr old DD got to the very full on bit with the settlers being scared that the native americans were about to massacre them at the end of Little House on the Prairie. (Interestingly there Laura's dad has a quite liberal/modern attitude and points out that they were there first and the settlers are the ones taking away their land).
I'm also not sure how I could control dd's reading short of not taking her to the library. Question is, when she gets to the age for them, do I give her all my old Biggles books out of my box upstairs? Now there's a good selection of classist, sexist and racist attitudes for you.

I loved Biggles. I had a bit of a crush on him.

Seeker, I'm not totally convinced the Narnia stories were explicitly written as propoganda, but even if they were, I think an argument could be made for Philip Pullman's Northern Lights trilogy being written as atheist propoganda. They are very definitely pushing a particular world view and creation view. Perhaps as much as the Narnia stories.

I would rather like my children to read both and be able to note the differences and compare them.

I do wonder how much of an issue it is - I think that the way we live in our everyday lives & the messages we give to our dcs really overwhelms the effect of the books they read.
Have to say, I grew up reading Biggles, Jennings, Narnia, EE Nesbit, Just William et al, also went to a C of E primary with prayers twice a day - but ended up an atheist/agnostic left wing liberal with anarchist leanings - funnily enough, rather much like my parents . . .