Monday, November 28, 2005

Above Our Bonus Room Door. . .



I rarely darken the door of a movie theater, but I'll be at the December 8th midnight showing for The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe. We have our friends from TN coming down, as well as Ashley, and my brother Ben and his girlfriend Stephanie. Friends from KY and AL couldn't make it because of transportation issues, but it'll still be a good time.

Visit this Swedish site to see a 9-minute supertrailer of the upcoming movie.

I have hopes that this adaptation will best the old BBC version. The cartoon winged-horses just never were my style. Then there were the beaver costumes - or were those furry sacks of potatoes? I still enjoy the old BBC version occasionally for old-time sake, but it definitely would never win any cinematography award. I do love the theme music, though.

Speaking of the BBC version, they showed it a few years back on public television and completely took out the whole "crucifixion" and "resurrection" scene. Needless to say, it made for a confusing and very different story. That's close to (but not nearly as bad as) Jesus Christ Superstar, which didn't even have a resurrection. May I not recommend that movie? There are some movies you just wish you could erase from your memory.

But back to Narnia. . .

My sister is - How shall I put this? - rather fixated on Narnia. She's been in kind of a daze of anticipation for the last several months. She's been known to hug lampposts in public. The sign above our bonus door was her idea, as well. I consider her to be a Narnian traitor, though, as she subscribes to pre-wardrobe orderology. I know - shocking! She actually advocates and defends the practice of placing The Magician's Nephew before The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe. Being a post-orderologist myself, let's just say that we've exchanged some words on this subject. I still love her, though.

I'm just glad that they are releasing the movies in the traditional order. It is getting harder and harder to find a bookset with the correct order now. I had to find mine at a yard sale for $2 :-). I know, the sacrifice! I'm still on the lookout for another traditional set for Ashley. But then, even if I did find one, I just might have to hide it until she gets a traditional nativity set. . . none of that Epiphany nonsense ;-).

14 comments:

Lydia said...

LOL! You crack me up, Susan. I love the "Spare Oom" sign above the door. What is a "bonus room?" I've never heard of such. Perhaps it is a difference in dialect between the midwest and the south:)

I have to take your sister's viewpoint in regards to pre-wardrobe ordeology. I will say that we have the old set so it is of the post-wardrobe ordeology persuasion, but I have been known to read book six before book one in sequence. I guess you could say I am a "strict chronologist":)

I, too, am greatly looking forward to the movie. That is, if I can convince my mom and younger sister that just because Disney produced it doesn't mean we should automatically boycott it.

My brother (C.S.) and I are planning to get a large group of fellow "Narnians" together for a showing at the theater. One question: How come it's already in the theaters in your area? Here it won't be released until December 9th. Hope all goes well for your group in seeing it. Let us know more after you have seen it. Keep up the wonderfully creative blogposts. (I'll still read them even though you are post-wardrobe ordeology:)

P.S. We have the complete set of BBC videos from books 1-4. I think the best video is Prince Caspian.

Ashley said...

Hmm... I was going to return the Narnia set you lent me, but now I wonder if I should keep it. ;-) I'll set it up next to my nativity scene - with the wise men, who are transcending time and space by visiting Jesus along with the shepherds.

I think it's a shame that Hannah has adopted the pre-wardrobe orderology. I had such high hopes for her... ;-) Well I promise to read those books to my children in the traditional order. And since Hannah isn't going to have kids, we don't have to worry about her. ;-)

Ben Garrison said...

link no workey. me want super-trailer!
go go gadget google...

Susan said...

It won't be out in our area until December 9th either, Lydia. Originally my title read "Less than 11 days. . . " - which admittedly should have been "Fewer than 11 days. . .", but I digress. I changed it when I added the Spare Oom picture, and forgot to put another reference to the future. Oops. We are going to the midnight showing on December 8th.

Here, an extra, non-bedroom room, often above the garage, is referred to as a bonus room, especilly in realty ads. We call it the bonus room, the spare room, the extra room, etc. It's just the room built above our garage.

Hannah and I have the old BBC versions as well, and still feel the urge to watch them occasionally, despite the lack of good cinematography. I think The Silver Chair may have been my favorite film adaptation.

Ashley, haha, it worked. Since you didn't reply to my Epiphany reply on your blog, I tricked you into doing so on my blog :). Yay!

Ben, oops. I'll try to fix the link. Hmmm. Oh, and are we going to be able to convince you to be Mr. Tumnus :-D. It would make the Zeglen girls year, I think.

Hannah :-) said...

Yay! I'm glad to have you join me, Lydia, in subscribing to "pre-wardrobe orderology". Yippee!! Haha, I have one more person on my side, Sus and Ashley! :-P
Let me ask all you "post-orderologists" something. What is the first book in the Bible, huh? Matthew? Exodus? NO! It is Genesis, I tell you!
Although, I'll admit that the entire Bible is definitely not in perfect chronological order, rather it's grouped. I was happy to recently find something showing how to read the Bible in chronological order. It always bugged me that it was a bit mixed up... although at least Genesis does come first!!
Where did that term "post(or pre)-orderologist" come from anyway? Did you make it up, Sus?

Narnia is coming.. hooray! hooray! Narnia is coming.. hooray! hooray! Narnia is coming.. hooray! hooray!.....
*big smile* :-D

Mr. Baggins said...

Ahh, Narnia. Isn't it delicious? BTW, for those out there who love Narnia so much (like me, for instance), that they want to spend an ungodly amount of money on it, get the Chronicles of Narnia from Easton Press ($46 per volume!). But these would last a lifetime. Furthermore, they are in no particular order (I don't think). So they would transcend the pre-post-wardrobe orderology! I just ordered them for our family. What I like about the trailer (thanks awfully for the link, Susan!) is the scope of Narnia. It's so big! In the Wonderworks version, it is so small. I can see that the animals will be stunning, too. What computers can do these days!

Mr. Baggins said...

To Hannah, though, I must reply. Why then is the Bible in the order in which we find it?

Adrian C. Keister said...

I'll come out of blog-hiding just this once to point out a travesty in the books. I don't mean the original published books, I mean the new HarperTrophy books. If you happen to own a copy of the original published work (say, published by Collier Books), then compare the following passage from the 13th chapter of The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe, Deep Magic from the Dawn of Time.

Collier version:
"Tell you?" said the Witch, her voice growing suddenly shriller. "Tell you what is written on that very Table of Stone which stands beside us? Tell you what is written in letters deep as a spear is long on the trunk of the World Ash Tree?..."

HarperTrophy version:
"Tell you?" said the Witch, her voice growing suddenly shriller. "Tell you what is written on that very Table of Stone which stands beside us? Tell you what is written in letters deep as a spear is long on the fire stones on the Secret Hill?..."

To anyone who knows a. anything about Norse mythology and b. anything about Lewis' love for Norse mythology, this idiotic replacement of HarperTrophy's makes no sense. The World Ash Tree is Yggdrasil, which is something Lewis would have known and would have had no issue placing in a fantasy such as this. "Fire stones on the Secret Hill" sounds like some third-rate thriller. I am incensed that HarperTrophy changed the words without telling anyone.

In Christ.

Susan said...

Yes, Hannah, I made up the "post-wardrobe" and "pre-wardrobe" orderology terms. A little fun with the tweaking of eschatological terms :). I considered making a distinction between historical pre-wardrobe orderologists and dispensational pre-wardrobe orderologists, but decided not. . .

Gulp, $46/volume. Wow. As much as I'd love a nice set, I think I'll stick with my 7 volumes/$2 set for a while.

So, Adrian, we're curious as to how you managed to notice the difference. The fact that they did that undercover incenses me too, but I admit I never would have noticed. You must have the books memorized :).

My books are older, so I'm pretty sure they are genuine, but Ashley has them right now so I can't check. Maybe we should write hate mail to Harper Trophy.

Ashley said...

You aren't getting your books back. I've already crossed out "Susan Garrison" from the inside cover of my new set.

By the way, happy 107th birthday to C.S. Lewis today. :-)
http://cslewis.drzeus.net/bio/

Adrian C. Keister said...

Reply to Susan.

How did I manage to notice the difference? Two things. One is that I read The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe approximately twenty times before the age of eighteen. The second is that I have a head for details. Many details, I admit, fall through the grid, but I always thought "World Ash Tree" was neat.

Incidentally, another change is in Chapter 7: A Day with the Beavers. The Colliers version, at the end of the third-to-last paragraph, says "And the cloth on the table tho' very clean was very rough." The HarperTrophy edition reads "And the cloth on the table, though very clean, was very rough." Apparently, HarperTrophy is not willing to pay Lewis the compliment of assuming that he meant what he wrote. Having the apostrophe in there is better, because it conveys a sense of rustic naturalness. The HarperTrophy edition, tho' better grammatically, doesn't read as well. And if you're wondering how I noticed this detail, it's the same reason as the other one.

In Christ.

Hannah :-) said...

Lane - I guess I've just assumed that the Bible was in that order to sometimes group certain books together that are similar/written by the same author/written by similar authors/etc., but also to still keep it in an order that is mostly chronological.
Why do you ask? Do you have any insight about the order of the Bible? I'd like to hear it.

Mr. Baggins said...

Well, I would say that the Bible's order has to with salvation history. Whenever there is a great event in the history of God's saving His people, He writes a good deal about it. For instance, the Exodus basically produced the Pentateuch, the entrance into the promised land produced many of the historical books, and Exile accounts for nearly all the rest of the OT. The NT, of course, is give to us right after Christ's work on earth. That is the *overall* chronological program of the Bible.

However, the Wisdom literature in the OT is not chronological at all. Some of it is written by Solomon, some by David (the Psalms is considered part of the Wisdom lit). When considering how much we would like to have the Bible in chronological order, we also have to consider what kind of lit a given book of the Bible is: is it law, narrative, poetry, prophecy, epistle, or apocalyptic? All of these and more are found in Scripture.

I can, for instance, say something like this: "I went to the store, and then I went to the nursing home, and then I went to the office." I could mean that I went to each of these places *in that order.* But I could *also* have meant that the first thing I mentioned was the most important, even though it came last in the sequence. This would make the most sense if someone had just asked me, "Did you go to the store?" I even used the word *then*.

I guess what I'm really after is that we not impose on Scripture our view of history-writing. We have to have things exactly in chronological order, or it doesn't seem to make sense. That is not how ancient history writers always wrote. They often wrote in chronological order. But sometimes they didn't. *That shouldn't bother us.* It is still the inspired Word of God, *without any errors.* That is what I wish to say.

Hannah :-) said...

That's true. However, I still enjoy getting the Biblical story in chronological order - not in place of the Biblical order, but in addition.
Thanks for responding! I enjoyed reading your thoughts on the subject.