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.
