My sister, my mom, my brother, and I are voracious readers. As in, we read entire book series in a matter of days. Reread our favorites within a week. Discuss characters, themes, plot twists to death. We are our own little book club circle. At any given point in a conversation, we'll say, " oh I am rereading Austen (all of them) or Anne of Green Gables (all of them) or Harry Potter or Narnia or Tolkien." My sister right now is rereading Anne of Green Gables. My mom just finished rereading the Hunger Games. I just finished Austen and Narnia (yes, all of them! ok minus Northhanger Abbey). I will probably start on Harry Potter soon just because. Perhaps I am in need of new reading material, but I've read quite a lot. It's just that most books fall into the "timeless classic books I'll read over and over again because they never fail to entertain" category or the "nice story, but too ______ for me to want to read it again" box. Most adult books post 1980 fall into the second category with a fill in the blank of "depressing" or "boring." Or "sexual." Really. Too many modern books found on the New York Times Bestseller list are depressing and sexual and most likely depressing because of how sexual they are. Barf. Give me kid's lit! Where more nobler themes of humanity are scrolled on every page. Adult themes don't hold my interest. While they might paint an actual picture of the state of humanity (how depressing!), they don't inspire and thus I don't really need to read them again. Plus, too much of life is that way for me to want to read fiction about it. Read stories about characters that destroy their lives, pfah. Might as well read the newspaper or watch the news.
But back to speaking of kid's lit, modern day kid's lit is a little different from say Lewis's Chronicles of Narnia. Actually, most kid's lit is. Having just finished the Silver Chair a day or two ago, I found it remarkable the number of anti- protagonists there are: Edmund, Eustace, even Peter and Susan in Prince Caspian, Jill Poole and even Digory in The Magician's Nephew. They are all fallen. ignoble characters who have to be redeemed by Aslan. Edmund wants to be King and subject his siblings to his power and gives into the White Witch. Peter and Susan ignore Lucy's wanting to follow Aslan and follow rationality over faith. Eustace is a mean bully who likes to complain and is selfish and rotten to his core. Jill is easily swayed by appearances and gives into the idea of comfort over obedience (see the chapter when they meet the Giants of North). Digory rings the bell that awakens Jadis in a fit of selfishness and impulsiveness, punching poor Polly in the process. Jadis, of course, is the future White Witch. Their actions reflect a rottenness in the heart as a motivation. A baseness they succumb to instead of fight against. They choose willingly to do the wrong thing. And thus fall and fail.
In contrast, Harry, Katniss, Percy Jackson and et al, tend to be true heroes, yes with faults, but faults they overcome nobly. They don't betray. They don't grumble. They overcome their selfishness. They may war against the selfish parts of themselves, but ultimately, they rise to the occasion and do the right thing. And we love them for it. We love Harry and Katniss and Percy's selflessness (okay in Katniss's case her sacrifice) and integrity. They inspire us to rise to the occasion and battle evil and conquer it. They don't fall and so are like the legends of old, ideals, people to look up to. People, characters who become immortal and synonymous with heroism.
So what does that say about Lewis's series where Edmund doesn't overcome his selfishness and Aslan has to pay for his crime. Eustace, too, has to learn humility the hard way and only through Aslan, does he become a decent and 'good' character. Lucy, Peter, Caspian for the most part are noble characters, and while they mess up, they are more in line with our traditional views of heroes and follow the type of Harry, Katniss, and Percy. Which makes it all the more interesting that Lewis writes in characters like Edmund and Eustace.Why does he give us fallen heros that have to look outside of themselves for goodness and nobility and that carry with them the marks and scars of their cowardice?
Is it because that it is more real to life than the plot lines of our favorite noble characters?Lewis's fallen characters reflect more human decisions and the human heart. And reality points more to the truth and action of the gospel. We all betray and give ourselves over to the White Witch through treachery and sin. We all choose the wrong way and become cowards, creatures of the dark side that cannot regain access to integrity and nobility except through the action of a more righteous other. The consequences of Edmund's betrayal is the most heavy and serious in the series and the one that makes us most feel the weight and gravity of our deepest and most shameful moments. Moments where our actions of sins rot us to the core and debase us so that we are not fit to be anything. Thankfully, the story goes on to tell that what is required is for another to come and take the punishment and restore us with, fingers crossed, humility. Jesus did that for us on the cross. Aslan did it for Edmund at the Stone Table And that's a story line that more children and adults need to hear: we can be restored, with God's help. As great as the story of Harry Potter, and Katniss Evergreen and Percy Jackson are, they can't help us be redeemed from our bad choices- they only show us what happens when we don't make them. And we need to know that bad choices are not our condemnation into villains and antagonists, but that we too can rise and become anti protagonists, fallen heroes, humble and true, part of a bigger story that will bring all the righteous into glory on the last day. Amen.
No comments:
Post a Comment