Narnia Annoyances

Tpolg wrote:

> Tim Bruening wrote:
> > SS13 wrote:
> >
> > > It is NOT possible. AIMB the Narnian Estate already denied at least
> > > THREE authors (Karol Lindskoog, Michel Faber and another) to publish
> > > such stories. Before 2033(earliest) it's only possible as fanfic or as
> > > manipulated story. (Like Neil Gaiman's "The problem of Susan").
> >
> > What's the address for the Narnian Estate?
>
> Here is The C.S. Lewis Company's
>
> The C.S. Lewis Co. Ltd.
> First Floor
> Unit 4, Old Generator House
> Bourne Valley Road
> Poole
> Dorset
> BH12 1DZ
> United Kingdom

Thanks.
 >> Stay informed about: Narnia Annoyances 

Tpolg wrote:
> Tim Bruening wrote:
> > SS13 wrote:
> > > It is NOT possible. AIMB the Narnian Estate already denied at least
> > > THREE authors (Karol Lindskoog, Michel Faber and another) to publish
> > > such stories. Before 2033(earliest) it's only possible as fanfic or as
> > > manipulated story. (Like Neil Gaiman's "The problem of Susan").
> > What's the address for the Narnian Estate?
>
>
> Here is The C.S. Lewis Company's
>
> The C.S. Lewis Co. Ltd.
> First Floor
> Unit 4, Old Generator House
> Bourne Valley Road
> Poole
> Dorset
> BH12 1DZ
> United Kingdom
>
>
> Personally I think the logical thing to do is just put an end to all
> this foolishness once and for all, and inoculate the Chronicles by
> publishing an official "Tale After Narnia". I am not saying allow it
> to be published, I am saying, endorse it! Here it is, all you people
> who do not think that such a book can be any good, don't have to read
> it. But for the rest of you, this is it.
> Fanfic, manipulated story, or whatever, becomes redundant or Silly at
> that point, as would any attempt to publish such stories in the future,
>
> legal or no.
> And thus it would be safe from both without and from
> within. For who is to say who will follow Douglas Gresham (may he live
> for ever) as custodian of the trust? We can hope that it will be a man
> of integrity, who loves and cherishes truth, beauty and goodness. But
> it could be someone who loves gold more than art and would sell the
> rights to such story to any trashy hack for a few quid. So let it be
> preserved now, for all generations while there reigns still in Cair
> Paravel one who knew the Prophesier himself.

I see no reason why anyone cannot do a followup to the original Narnia
series. If the work is original I do not think the publisher can do
anything about it.

Mabon Dane
 >> Stay informed about: Narnia Annoyances 

"Mabon Dane" <haverhill RemoveThis @h2009.com> writes:
> I see no reason why anyone cannot do a followup to the original Narnia
> series. If the work is original I do not think the publisher can do
> anything about it.

A sequel is a derivative work. According to my layman's understanding,
publishing a derivative work without the permission of the owner of the
original's copyright is copyright infringement (although things differ
some in the case of parody).

--
Jeff
 >> Stay informed about: Narnia Annoyances 

Jeff Urs wrote:

> "Mabon Dane" <haverhill.RemoveThis@h2009.com> writes:
> > I see no reason why anyone cannot do a followup to the original Narnia
> > series. If the work is original I do not think the publisher can do
> > anything about it.
>
> A sequel is a derivative work. According to my layman's understanding,
> publishing a derivative work without the permission of the owner of the
> original's copyright is copyright infringement (although things differ
> some in the case of parody).

So a parody of Narnia might be legal. Any parody suggestions?
 >> Stay informed about: Narnia Annoyances 

rosybloom.DeleteThis@verizon.net wrote:

> 1. Why do the Narnians need us to constantly pull their asses out of
> the fire? Why can't they do it? Why kids? Why can't older people come
> to Narnia? Why kids from our world in particular? Why doesn't Aslan
> ever help them? Does Narnia exist just to test the character of a group
> of children? Why is Aslan so interested in just these kids? How many
> other earthlings have been to Narnia? Lewis never clearly set down just
> what the relation was between that world and ours.

Aslan does help. He tackled the White Witch as she was about to kill
Peter. He gave his life to save Edmund. He brought reenforcements for
Peter.
 >> Stay informed about: Narnia Annoyances 

rosybloom.RemoveThis@verizon.net wrote:

> 1. Why do the Narnians need us to constantly pull their asses out of
> the fire? Why can't they do it? Why kids? Why can't older people come
> to Narnia? Why kids from our world in particular? Why doesn't Aslan
> ever help them? Does Narnia exist just to test the character of a group
> of children? Why is Aslan so interested in just these kids? How many
> other earthlings have been to Narnia? Lewis never clearly set down just
> what the relation was between that world and ours.
>
> 2. I find troubling the notion that these children lived full lives as
> adults then were transformed back into children. Did they retain all
> their adult memories in childish minds? Do they remember adult sexual
> experiences?
>
> 3. Anyone find it disturbing that while the talking animals are
> untouchable, nobody sees anything wrong in eating the dumb ones? All
> animals are equal, some animals are more equal than others.
>
> 4. Narnia was destroyed, how did the underground dwellers and sea
> people get out?
>
> 5. Aslan is constantly driving the children to self-flagellation over
> such minor wrongs. Digory purely by accident lets the witch in. Lucy
> follows her brothers and sister instead of following Aslan into the
> woods alone, and later spys on her friends. Jill shows off how brave
> she is, then fails to recognize the city.
>
> They are all judged *so* harshly for such *minor* sins. It sits very
> badly when you realize they are *school children* plucked from their
> own universe to risk their lives on adventures fighting the forces of
> evil. Realistically, that they did anything more than sob, collapse,
> and die shows incredible strength of character. It made me hate Aslan.
>
> This is from The Natural History of Make-Believe by John Goldthwaite.
>
> "The first adventure had begun in the spirit of a school holiday, but
> this was a deception: these children are about to be examined more
> rigorously than ever they were at school; one of them Lewis is
> literally going to damn to hell. Unlike a Pinocchio, moreover, they
> will not even enjoy the freedom and dignity of their own thoughts along
> the way. The oft-scolded Pinocchio was only being asked to look to his
> studies, after all; he was otherwise free to think and run loose as he
> chose. In Christian terms he had the full free will necessary to make
> his actions meaningful. Lewis's children are puppets in a way that
> Pinocchio was not. It is possible, of course, that they are lacking
> free will by default; for where Collodi could quote straight from a
> child's brain and heart, Lewis seems not to have had a clue. His
> children are stock characters from series books, and they think in the
> clichés of series books. Occasionally they sound at least as
> convincing as Nesbit's children, but usually not, for he lacked
> Nesbit's ear for child-talk. The Pevensies and their friends speak the
> rhetoric of adventure and school stories. As a consequence, Lewis could
> ignore them as real persons and deal with them punitively at his
> leisure. The voice of the hall proctor stalks these pages, monitoring
> the children's every move and thought. Lewis judges their already
> predestined decisions, counts the demerits of their tears, and sets
> them to monitoring one another for lapses in right behavior."
>
> 6. Everyone in Heaven seems to forget about Susan whose entire family
> had been incinerated. With no money and no family, Susan's only
> recourse is the brothel, where she becomes hooked on drugs, is beaten
> by her Johns, and dies from a botched abortion.
>
> Well, that's what you get for wearing lipstick.

7: The fact that we never find out what Aslan and Edmund said to each other
after he was rescued from the White Witch.

8: Peter, Susan, Edmund, and Lucy blundering back through the wardrobe at
the end of LWW, never to rule Narnia again.
 >> Stay informed about: Narnia Annoyances 

Mabon Dane wrote:

> There is an old celtic idea that a ruler is married to the land rather
> than to any person. The very earth of Narnia is considered living and
> magical (did the citizens of Narnia not spring from the earth?), so
> perhaps the rulers of Narnia were expected to have only a bond to the
> land rather than get married.

How would they generate (legitimate) heirs if they don't get married?
 >> Stay informed about: Narnia Annoyances 

Tim Bruening <tsbrueni.RemoveThis@pop.dcn.davis.ca.us> wrote:
>Mabon Dane wrote:
>> There is an old celtic idea that a ruler is married to the land rather
>> than to any person. The very earth of Narnia is considered living and
>> magical (did the citizens of Narnia not spring from the earth?), so
>> perhaps the rulers of Narnia were expected to have only a bond to the
>> land rather than get married.
>
>How would they generate (legitimate) heirs if they don't get married?

....That's NEVER stopped any aristocracy before.

Dave "what does marriage have to do with legitimacy?" DeLaney
--
\/David DeLaney posting from dbd.RemoveThis@vic.com "It's not the pot that grows the flower
It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see
Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK>
http://www.vic.com/~dbd/ - net.legends FAQ & Magic / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.
 >> Stay informed about: Narnia Annoyances 

David DeLaney wrote:

> Tim Bruening <tsbrueni.TakeThisOut@pop.dcn.davis.ca.us> wrote:
> >Mabon Dane wrote:
> >> There is an old celtic idea that a ruler is married to the land rather
> >> than to any person. The very earth of Narnia is considered living and
> >> magical (did the citizens of Narnia not spring from the earth?), so
> >> perhaps the rulers of Narnia were expected to have only a bond to the
> >> land rather than get married.
> >
> >How would they generate (legitimate) heirs if they don't get married?
>
> ...That's NEVER stopped any aristocracy before.

However, Peter et al don't appear to ever had had ANY lovers! Isn't that odd?
 >> Stay informed about: Narnia Annoyances 

"Tim Bruening" <tsbrueni.TakeThisOut@pop.dcn.davis.ca.us> wrote in message
news:47A3BA4D.8F875A14@pop.dcn.davis.ca.us...
>
>
> David DeLaney wrote:
>
>> Tim Bruening <tsbrueni.TakeThisOut@pop.dcn.davis.ca.us> wrote:
>> >Mabon Dane wrote:
>> >> There is an old celtic idea that a ruler is married to the land rather
>> >> than to any person. The very earth of Narnia is considered living and
>> >> magical (did the citizens of Narnia not spring from the earth?), so
>> >> perhaps the rulers of Narnia were expected to have only a bond to the
>> >> land rather than get married.
>> >
>> >How would they generate (legitimate) heirs if they don't get married?
>>
>> ...That's NEVER stopped any aristocracy before.
>
> However, Peter et al don't appear to ever had had ANY lovers! Isn't that
> odd?
>
>
Haven't you read The Horse and His Boy? Queen Susan is attracted (for a
while) to Prince Rabadash of Calormen, but only until she sees him in his
own country and realises what kind of man he really is.
 >> Stay informed about: Narnia Annoyances 

"SALLY BURR" <sally.burr1 DeleteThis @blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in
news:q4Apj.77650$Kt4.32949@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk:

> Haven't you read The Horse and His Boy? Queen Susan is
attracted (for
> a while) to Prince Rabadash of Calormen, but only until she
sees him
> in his own country and realises what kind of man he really
is.
>

Hey, you are talking about Rabadash the Peacemaker!
 >> Stay informed about: Narnia Annoyances 

Gene Ward Smith wrote:

> "SALLY BURR" <sally.burr1.DeleteThis@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in
> news:q4Apj.77650$Kt4.32949@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk:
>
> > Haven't you read The Horse and His Boy? Queen Susan is
> attracted (for
> > a while) to Prince Rabadash of Calormen, but only until she
> sees him
> > in his own country and realises what kind of man he really
> is.
> >
>
> Hey, you are talking about Rabadash the Peacemaker!

That was because he would turn into a donkey if he got too far from the
castle, so he didn't dare go to war.

I'm amazed he was able to assume the throne after having been turned
into a donkey and reverting to a man in front of several thousand
people.
 >> Stay informed about: Narnia Annoyances