Customer Reviews

The Magician's Book: A Skeptic's Adventures in Narnia

5 star:		(7)
4 star:		(11)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

Laura Miller's The Magician's Book: A Skeptic's Adventures in Narnia is part literary history and critique, part biography, and part memoir. She combines all of these genres wonderfully in the pursuit of one goal: to convince readers that there is more to C.S. Lewis' Chronicles of Narnia than their reduction to Christian allegory.

Miller's intentions are not entirely benign; she takes the Christian themes of Narnia very personally, and is frankly put off by them. As a self-described "skeptic," she drifted away from the religion of her youth and settled on an idea of Christianity that leaves little to be desired. And yet, The Chronicles of Narnia remain the most important books of her lifetime. How can she settle the apparent discrepancy between her unbelief and her love of books so seemingly full of belief?

Miller constructs this book in three parts, which seem to mirror the progression of her own relationship with Narnia. In the first part, she articulates all the reasons to love Narnia. It's a magical place, full of talking animals, with the appeal of a secret, private garden. Children especially identify with the world of Narnia because there, children are tested and challenged, and what they do matters. There is a satisfying weight to their thoughts and actions, and in a real world typically condescending to kids, young people find Narnia liberating.

The second section of Miller's book details her discovery of the blatant Christian themes in Narnia. This was a betrayal to her, the idea of an agenda being injected into an otherwise pure reading experience. Now that C.S. Lewis the author is revealed in Narnia, she begins to realize there are other reasons not to blindly trust in the epic. Themes of racism, sexism, and elitism are apparent in the Chronicles, all stemming from Lewis' own flaws as a person. Miller is left feeling alienated and upset, until she gets some advice from author Philip Pullman, himself a detractor of Lewis and his creative worlds. Pullman tells Miller that if she is really interested in making peace with Narnia, she must find "another way in."

The third section of The Magician's Book is a scholarly examination of the influences on Lewis at the time he wrote Narnia. The English landscape surrounding his home and haunts, his interest in Norse mythology and medieval romance, and especially his close relationship with fellow author J.R.R. Tolkein - all of these experiences factored in to the creation of Narnia as much as Lewis' conversion to Christianity. In finding evidence of these other crucial contributions to Narnia's universe, Miller is in essence "reclaiming" (as she puts it) Narnia for the readers who gain little from a Christian examination of the books.

The Magician's Book is so well-written - I was consistently impressed with Miller's thorough research and amazing ability to transition from one idea to the next. Her interviews with other authors are seamlessly woven into the path of her journey here, and I felt the contemporary views really added to my understanding. Miller doesn't require her readers to be fellow experts in the Chronicles books - she does an excellent job summarizing parts of the books under examination. The only prerequisite to enjoying Miller's effort is a love of reading, and an appreciation for the many whys and worlds involved in the creation of any given text.

Finally, While it is clear that Miller is trying to come to a heightened idea of "full circle" (love-hate-love Narnia), I must confess that I got caught up in the centrifugal force of the final turn. The third section was very heavy in research, and I felt it lost some of the more intimate tone of the first two sections. Still, I came away feeling that this book is an important companion to anyone's understanding and appreciation of C.S. Lewis' Chronicles of Narnia. I will also be enthusiastically recommending this as a book club read, since there is much opportunity for discussion, and I'm eager to pick the brains of other book lovers and new fans of Laura Miller.

Similar to the tension with which Laura Miller loves the Narnia books but vilifies certain positions the author (C.S. Lewis) takes, I intend to do the same with this review of "The Magician's Book". :-) I liked her book immensely, but at times her unchecked political correctness mistakes good for ill (much like an overactive immune system, damaging as it seeks to serve). The reader will appreciate Miller's nod to objectivity and transparency when laying down her cards in the first chapter: "I began The Magician's Book hoping to explain not only why but how it is still possible for me to love these books, despite the biases and small-mindedness they sometimes display, despite often feeling that I wouldn't have much liked the man who wrote them". And throughout her text, she expresses the wonder with which Lewis could create the literary constructs that produced such longing and desire for otherworldly intimacy within her. While Lewis would claim that such things are written on the heart, and that God uses myths to call us to himself, Miller attempts to develop a purely humanistic rational for these desires.

Miller is at her best when distilling the various types of literary forms (allegory, metaphor, etc.), and in her exploration of Lewis's literary influences (Arthurian legends, Norse mythology, Celtic folktales, the "wildness" of faery lore, etc.). She explores many story archetypes, helps the reader identify them in other (non-Narnian) contexts, and does so in way that doesn't sacrifice any meaning or enjoyment in their reading.

She deconstructs the world views of Lewis's time and of the previous eras that shaped his ideas, but never in a way that cuts Lewis any slack. Ironically, in not turning that same criteria on herself, Miller fails to qualify how her contemporary sensitivities may likewise be responsible for most of her objections to Lewis's life and works. Fortunately, there are only a few chapters where Miller, indulging in a bit of unnecessary ivory tower political correctness, tediously grasps for something in which to find offense. In chapter 6 (and a bit at the end of Chp 12), she succumbs to minor feminist trappings as she wrestles with the fact that there are (indeed) gender differences, and that they play out in Lewis behaved and wrote. But she feels obliged to judge books written 60 years ago by modern progressive ideals, even when Lewis gave so very little to argue with on the gender front. And in Chapters 11 and 13, she bashes Lewis for the "dark-skinned Calormenes" and their "garlic", but falls far short of making her case that Lewis was racist (against Turkish people, of all things). Apparently she doesn't want Lewis speaking ill of imaginary people groups, since that's a small step away from judging real people. Again, the modern mindset (in this case, a reluctance to refer to another country as enemies) conducts a lengthy and tedious hearing on the matter, then gives itself a congratulatory pat on the back.

She obviously has high respect for Pullman and Gainman (quoting them frequently, and giving them a venue to throw moral stones), but is very selective with her representation of them and their works, especially on issues that would demonize Lewis had he done likewise. For example, she takes the time to describe Gainmen's short story, "The Problem of Susan", but fails to mention small details like Aslan eats Susan and Lucy, and has sex with the White Witch (the short story is very graphic). Such double standards makes me skeptical of the remaining balance of the book that I otherwise might consider objective.

Despite the above reservations, Miller has done her homework, and has many intriguing and probably original ideas I would not have come up with on my own. You get the feeling that Narnia is the root structure into which she's grafted much of her literary adult life (writing the book was probably therapy for her), so it's unsurprising that she'd have some fresh insights along the way. For not sharing Lewis's faith, she did a good job describing what Lewis meant by "joy". In fact, the very idea of anti-Christian pro-Narnia literary analysis should be enough to intrigue many a reader. Those that know only one side of a viewpoint know very little of that side, and Miller book stands ready to broaden the discussion for everyone.

Some might avoid this book when they consider it is written from a skeptic's point of view, and may include criticism of the much loved C. S. Lewis's Chronicles of Narnia. I thought I might find it offensive, too, but to the contrary, I found it to be quite insightful, thought-provoking, and inspirational. Laura Miller has put together a work of beauty, a feast of childhood memories. The Magician's Book has a spiritual quality--that mystic veil of childhood awareness, the ability to see and sense things adults have long forgotten. It returns us to the books we loved so long ago; and that child-spirit, the essence of something eternal, innocent, trusting, and beautiful.

This is a book lover's book, reminding us of the precious volumes which shaped and formed, in large part, who we are today.

Somehow I missed reading The Chronicles of Narnia as a child. I came to them late, after hearing them enthusiastically recommended by students and professors at my church-affiliated college. I enjoy them, though not on the same level as J.R.R. Tolkien's works, which I was fortunate enough to first encounter at the age of 12. Because of my religious background, the figurative nature of the Narnia books was always apparent to me, but I doubt that I would have recognized it had I read them at a younger age.

The fact that C.S. Lewis wrote The Chronicles as a somewhat allegorical introduction to Christianity turns off some readers and makes others like Laura Miller, the author of The Magician's Book, feel betrayed. Its true that sometimes the symbolism is heavy handed and the fates of some of the characters like Susan Pevensie, who doesn't get to go to the new Narnia (heaven) in book 7 because she likes lipstick and boys, are disturbing.

Laura Miller discusses these and many other aspects of Narnia in The Magician's Book. Its partly a biography of Lewis and his friends, including J.R.R. Tolkien, and partly critical analysis of the Narnia books. Its also partly autobiographical, as Miller spends a lot of time describing her own relationship with the books. I especially liked Part One, Songs of Innocence, which is an examination of other great children's books.

What I found most rewarding about The Magician's Book is its insistence that children should be encouraged to read as much and as widely as possible, and that writers of children's books have a duty to make their work as fine as it possibly can be. I didn't always agree with Miller, but I found her book as enjoyable and intriguing as Lewis' work itself.

A study of C. S. Lewis' Narnia series from an intriguing perspective: that of a nonbeliever. Miller makes it clear in her prologue that she is enthusiastic about Lewis' work but remains unmoved by its Christian message. As a Christian myself, I was preparing for something that was perhaps bitter or deconstructionist, but it is neither. Like Lewis himself, Miller has a talent for presenting a complex subject in a concise and direct manner, well organized and reasoned without being dry.

Miller reveals the influences that led to Narnia, from country Irish landscapes to the British Empire's encounter with the Middle and Far East, from boarding schools to medieval cosmology, from Norse gods to Greek heroes. One of the most fascinating chapters deals with the contrast between Tolkien's purist approach to language and culture, and Lewis' more inclusive patchwork: Anglo vs. Irish, Catholic vs. Protestant, one vs. many.

She preserves the sense of wonder and mystery of her subject even while she examines its structure and origins, something which is difficult to do at all, let alone do well. I recommend this book highly to anyone who loves Narnia, and would encourage fellow Christians to read it as well. Much of what has been written about Narnia assumes that its magic is only window dressing for the Gospel message; Miller reveals its other richness.

What would be the point of reading a book about "A Skeptic's Adventures in Narnia" if you aren't familiar with, or better yet, a fan of C.S. Lewis's fantasies?

That was my question to myself when I started The Magician's Book. I never read or have even been tempted to read The Lion, The Witch, and the Wardrobe or the sequels. But I've enjoyed Laura Miller's articles in Salon over the years, and was curious to see what she had to say about children's literature. And there is a great deal here that speaks to any reader of children's literature or even of literature in general. Miller talks about the nature of reading and of storytelling, and it isn't necessary to have read the Chronicles of Narnia books to appreciate her observations.

Miller begins her book by recalling the way she read as a child, without being critical, taking everything at face value. With age and experience we learn to question a writer's biases and to become critical, not in the sense of finding fault, but in the sense of being discerning and learning what makes some stories better than others. We lose something when we learn to be critical in a literary sense, but we gain even more. We lose some of the sense of wonder and the sheer enjoyment, but we gain knowledge and understanding.

Miller uses Narnia as a springboard for discussing several themes that run through literature, and not just children's literature. Her chapter on why Lewis made a major character in his stories a girl, a seemingly odd choice for a man of his background, includes a discussion of horror movies. She uses Carol J. Clover's ground-breaking book, Men, Women, and Chain Saws: Gender in the Modern Horror Film, to illustrate how the "final girl," as Clover calls the heroine in horror movies, allows the male viewer (or reader) to experience vicarious fear and vulnerability through a female character.

Even if you haven't read Narnia, you'll surely have read some of the many books Miller discusses here: The Little House on the Prairie series, Mary Poppins, Island of the Blue Dolphins, Animal Farm, The Wind in the Willows, and Lewis Carroll's stories. Keats, Kafka, Franzen, Austen, even Agatha Christie are among the representatives of adult literature that Miller draws upon to make her points. I skipped much of the discussions pertaining to C.S. Lewis's life and writing, but there was still quite a lot in The Magician's Book to make it enjoyable and thought-provoking.

I have two small quibbles with The Magician's Tale. This is the sort of book that bibliographies were made for, and yet, there is none here. And for a book that discusses children's fantasy literature at great length, the absence of Harry Potter is glaring. She mentions him in passing at one point, but that's it. Also of interest for readers of The Magician's Tale - The Child That Books Built: A Life in Reading by Francis Spufford.

I picked up Laura Miller's The Magician's Book with high expectations. Fans of Narnia know that Lucy reads a story in Coriakin's book on the Island of the Voices, and this story becomes the standard by which she judges all books. Miller makes the case that each of us book-lovers has a Magician's Book, the one book we read in childhood that impressed itself firmly on our young minds and shaped who we are today. I've blogged about a similar theory, calling it a haunting. Certain books we read as children never leave us.

Savoring this splendid conceit for the title, I settled down to enjoy Miller's collection of essays on Narnia and its creator, C. S. Lewis. Within a few pages I was starting to feel uneasy. There were some decent discussions on what it means to be a "bookish child" and why Lewis' Talking Animals are so popular with young readers (it is because children are "immigrants" from the realm of non-language). But after that, the essays steadily declined in quality. Miller's arrogant tone was hard to enjoy; at one point she claims that the Chronicles taught her nothing as a child; she merely recognized "her better self" in them (page 172*). In the section where Miller is discussing herself as a "bookish child," the air of self-congratulation is very off-putting.

The book's subtitle -- "A Skeptic's Adventures in Narnia" -- is rather misleading. The bulk of the essays in this book start with one idea from the Chronicles as a launching point for a discussion of Lewis rather than of Narnia itself. Miller's offhand assumption that A. N. Wilson is Lewis' "most distinguished biographer" is highly suspect; that claim isn't established in the least (page 39*). If distinguished biography consists of taking everything the subject wrote and contradicting it with the biographer's own specious theories, Wilson may indeed be the best at this game. But his work has been roundly denounced as inaccurate, highly conjectural, and even blatantly untrue on several counts by other scholars and people who knew Lewis.

Miller betrays her own personal scorn for Lewis as a person in several passages, writing in one chapter that "It was via that late-night talk with Tolkien and Hugo Dyson in 1931 that he'd [Lewis had] converted (or at least that is what he chose to believe)" (page 216*, emphasis mine). I believe Lewis would know the circumstances of his own conversion a little better than a biased critic writing over 70 years later. Miller also admits that she is sure she would not like Lewis if she met him. Approaching an author with a preconceived and personal dislike is no way to start biographical work. This authorial prejudice is yet another problematic element in an already questionable book.

Miller's dislike of Lewis seems to stem from her overarching dislike of Christians, whom she insults often. In the introduction, she writes that one area she was just going to "fly over" in this book is Lewis' Christianity (page 14*). If by "fly over" she meant "fly over and drop all the bombs I can," that's an accurate description of her methods. I found her insensitivity and intolerance disturbing. A very mild example of this is on page 126*, where she is writing about a former atheist named Francis S. Collins. She writes that Collins was given Lewis' Mere Christianity by a Methodist minister, taking unfair advantage of Collins who must have been "ripe for the plucking." It's interesting how Miller's invective shows especially when discussing people's conversions to Christianity, as with Lewis' own conversion (see above). A cruder jab is found on pages 166-167*, where Miller writes that sexual sadomasochism and religion are the same thing with different trappings, and that religious people are really just nonsexual sadomasochists looking for that particular relational dynamic.

Another issue is Miller's fawning compliments to Philip Pullman, well-known for his vicious and unbalanced criticism of Lewis and especially the Chronicles. There may or may not be merit in Pullman's basic arguments, but his abusive style makes it difficult for an intelligent reader to take him seriously. Flattering him as a man whose "intelligence, curiosity, and good humor" should be emulated is simply transparent propaganda (page 305*). One wonders if there is some literary back-scratching going on.

I don't think Miller understands that if all the many things she personally finds offensive -- especially Lewis' Christianity -- were expunged from the Chronicles, Narnia would become the insipid fantasyland of so many modern imitators. If modern readers recreate Narnia in their own image, it will cease to be Narnia.

Miller's writing style is of mixed quality; sometimes she puts things very succinctly, but other times the dependent clauses make the prose awkward and difficult to read. I am a professional editor and I found myself trying to fix Miller's sentences in several passages. This carelessness extends to the content as well; for example, she refers to J. R. R. Tolkien's The Lord of the Rings as a "trilogy" on several occasions (pages 98, 235, 238*). A trilogy is a set of three books that are related in theme but that can stand independently of one another as three individual stories. This is obviously not the case with The Lord of the Rings, which is one story originally published in three volumes because of the cost of paper after the war. The work is most emphatically not a trilogy, and it pains me to see a literary critic misapplying such a basic term.

In the end, Miller brings nothing new to the discussion on Lewis and Narnia. She trots out all the usual objections critics make to the Chronicles, and essentially finds new ways to restate them without adding anything original to the literature. Readers searching for scholarly work on Lewis would do better to look to the original sources rather than Miller's lackluster summation. And lay readers who enjoy the Chronicles won't find much insight here. I was looking forward to reviewing this book in response to the publisher's gracious request, but unfortunately it was a great disappointment. Not recommended.

*Please note all quotations are taken from the Advance Reader's Copy of the book.

This jarring declaration by author Laura Miller conveys a great deal about The Magician's Book. It's an eminently readable (with the exception of the overuse of the word "eponymous") swirl of Gnosticism, orthodoxy, and political correctness.

The author describes how her life was changed, in grade two, when her teacher handed her a copy of The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe saying, "I think you'll like this one".

What Miller herself readily identifies as the "slightly supernatural" intuition of her teacher ushers her into a new world far removed from that of "...station wagons and jump rope, backyard swim classes, and spelling tests" in which she had grown up. She is held in thrall, never to be the same again.

The first section of the book, "Songs of Innocence", describes aspects of her youthful love affair with Narnia. This is the part that I liked best.

In "Trouble in Paradise", the second section of the book, Miller grapples with the dissonance that was precipitated by her revelation, later in life, that the Chronicles are carriers of deep Christian themes and symbols. This finding causes her to recoil from what she once has loved, and she describes the sense of betrayal that ensues. Her response is to attack Lewis, assailing him for purported racism, elitism, misogyny, and worse.

And so, the White Witch is a dominatrix. In a world of political correctness this makes more sense than unflinchingly identifying some things as inherently good, and others as absolutely evil.

The final section, "Songs of Experience" attempts to provide a resolution to what the author would otherwise see as an untenable position; the agnostic co-founder of salon.com who ultimately cannot help but love the orthodox land of Narnia.

The "Other Way In" that allows Miller to return to Narnia is the ancient path of knowledge. She describes it as follows: "Having lost our innocence, we must pursue understanding, knowledge, and experience to its furthest reaches. There we can hope to regain, not our lost grace, but perhaps a superior one".

Lewis himself would certainly have bridled at this Gnostic worldview.

What the author never considers is that her difficulty with the Christian content of the Chronicles may in fact stem from a lack of understanding of Christianity itself. It seems that she makes the common error of substituting broken manifestations of organized religion for the essential holy impulse to the Divine. This is evident as she writes, "It would never have occurred to me to liken Narnia to the Roman Catholicism in which I was raised". And she elaborates further, "Narnia was liberation and delight. Christianity was boredom, subjugation, and reproach".

Lewis would certainly have argued that the symbolism of the Chronicles was not a hidden agenda aimed at the conversion of unsuspecting children, but rather the wellspring of life that caused Miller and so many others to fall in love with the books in the first place.

Even though I don't agree with the author's conclusions, I still recommend The Magician's Book. It's deep, enjoyable to read, and makes you think.

Anyway, enough of this - I'm logging on to Salon...

I enjoyed reading this tremendously. I'm no longer a "friend of Narnia" as such, but like Miller, sure was as a child. Perhaps not quite as fanatic (my imaginary land of choice being Wonderland), but I did reread them too and loved the Chronicles very much (and, yes, have my Puffin box set among my favorite childhood books).

Then I remember well teaching The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe for the first time as a young teacher and being shocked, shocked! at the heavy-handed Christian themes. But the ten year-olds I was teaching didn't notice anymore than I did when their age. Back then I thought they should, it floored me that anyone could miss it, but I've mellowed since then and now Miller helps to explain just why children pay no attention. Makes total sense to me now because I better understand that children read with a completely different body of experience to work off us from us grown-ups. The imagination is a wonderful thing and works differently at different points in our lives.

Miller writes beautifully and slips in all sorts of fascinating tidbits into this book. It is a blend of memoir, biography, criticism, journalism, and scholarship. I loved the way she wove in and out her own musings, quotes from interviews (especially those from Neil Gaiman and Susanna Clarke), clear descriptions of Lewis's more academic writing (especially on writing and reading), the relationship with Tolkien, interesting reports on more obscure books read and loved by Lewis, and just a lot on the act of reading.

The one frustration for me is that there are no end notes, bibliography, or references of any sort. I'm assuming that was intentional as it is very journalistic and meant to appeal, no doubt, to a general audience, but I would have liked to have seen some of the citations.

Laura Miller is a cofounder of Salon.com and writes frequently in The New York Times Book Review. She is also the editor of The Salon.com Reader's Guide to Contemporary Authors. In The Magician's Book, she takes readers back to her discovery of C.S. Lewis' The Chronicles Of Narnia, and how they changed her life as a child.

Miller was entranced by the books as soon as she read them. This absorption lasted for many years, but then was marred when she read some criticism and realised what had been obvious to most adult readers; that the Chronicles were an allegory that replayed the Christian tenets of a savior who self-sacrifices to save the world. She felt manipulated and used, and it took many years before she could come back and enjoy the series again as an adult.

The book gives the reader background about Lewis' life, his friends and his influences. He was a great friend of Tolkien, who was writing his epic Lord Of The Rings series. But while Tolkien was very serious, creating an entire universe and worried about its consistency, Lewis saw his series as fairy tales and borrowed bits and pieces that didn't make logical sense but somehow combined into a magical world.

There is also much discussion of how language is used; how older, oral literature is mirrored in more modern works, and how authors construct their works. This is a fascinating look behind the scenes that only someone as connected to this world as Miller can give the average reader. She also brings in several other modern authors like Neil Gaiman and Susannah Clark for their childhood and adult reactions to the Chronicles.

This book is recommended for those readers who enjoyed the Chronicles as a child and who are interested to see how they were constructed and the meanings behind various scenes. I've been listening to the books this past year with my daughter and so found this book fascinating.