@davidd I think it's just to me personally, when I do get to have a good glimpse into a character like Susan I can give her credit and some benefit, when the author gives her some good and bad traits which is also very important to me. When he offers a three pages character given to such a good structured character like Caspian I can't really take her personality as valid and well thought, because it clearly works as romance trope. Since we don't know much about her I gave her a unique role in my story even though she remains Caspian's queen but in another level.

The reason I always claimed that Ramandu's Daughter isn't a good queen is because she grew up in an isolated island with limited vision of the outside world and she also lived with the belief that violence is immediately punished by a sleeping spell. Of course that doesn't reduce her character entirely but it also doesn't make her capable of ascending to a throne immediately, just because she is beautiful and for the reader not to know who that queen is to the side of such an important character. Imagine living a peaceful and utopian life and then suddenly you have the responsibility of a kingdom in politics, life changing choices, possibly poverty and struggles. And Caspian chose her because she was beautiful, a quick and irrational decision to be honest.

We actually get a good glimpse of Susan as a queen, her poise, her confidence and she even experienced great adventures, life lessons, a life where she has missed, was hurt and even as you said had struggled in school. She learned how to be a good queen to her people through the years of her reign but before that she learned what the struggles of those people were. We know her and she has known life. In my own opinion a good and true queen is someone who knows her people well, good will and intention is never enough. 

This is why I believe Caspian probably reigned in solo and maybe it took a decade for Lilliandil to adapt as a queen, probably after being struck by the harsh reality outside Ramandu's Island. This is maybe the reason why they had a kid so much later and it's a strong topic I am discovering in my own story as well, where Lilliandil faces many brutal realities of the human nature, how good intentions are not always enough and how heavy the responsibility of a high position can be. 

Lilliandil worked as a trope, Susan worked as a character. And I always value characters more as I have stated many times. 

@davidd I had never heard this theory of each of the seven Lord's representing one of the seven deadly sins until this year.  I heard it in two episodes on "Into The Wardrobe":The Seven Lost Lords: Narnia's Hidden Message in Voyage of the Dawn TreaderandNarnia's Hidden Message in Voyage of the Dawn Treader: PART 2.  Interesting that you bring it up too, I guess the theory is more mainstream than I realized.

I watched both links from "Into the Wardrobe", & found their insights most revealing. It was interesting that the compère chose a different selection of Seven Deadly Sins, and that also he mentioned both their Latin names and why he chose each one. 

I never thought at any time that what I was doing was not mainstream, already, standard Christianity, when as far as I knew & learned as a youngster & when I was writing an essay for Scribbulus in August 2006. The 7 Deadly Sins were formulated from Pope Gregory 1, the Great's studies of the Old Testament book of Job, also present in the Tanakh (Hebrew Holy Scriptures, 1952 Harkavy edition) in a section called "Writings", consisting of Psalms, Proverbs, Job, Esther, Daniel, Song of Solomon, Ecclesiastes, Ruth, Ezra, Nehemiah, & 1 & 2 Chronicles.

Pope Gregory 1st was the one who sent St Augustine of Canterbury to preach Christianity to the Jutes of Kent in 597 AD on the Isle of Thanet. Your Into the Wardrobe items listed them as below, which I took from Wikipedia. Interestingly, like Into the Wardrobe, Wikipedia now mentions eight deadly sins, according to the Greek-speaking fourth-century monk Evagrius Ponticus reduced the logismoi (or forms of temptation) from nine to eight in number, as follows:^[

1. Luxuria/Fornicatio (lust, fornication) [Lord Bern according to the 1TW site was guilty of self-gratification when he settled down with a wife & family on the Lone Islands, instead of getting on with his job as a warrior with his fellow lords. Originally, I picked "luxuria" because of the slavery on the Lone Islands, not blaming Lord Bern when he was Caspian's rescuer].
2. Superbia (pride) [According to ITW, Eustace was guilty of pride when he loved to boast, & to appear better than anyone else. There is also a link with the name of Lord Octesian, especially with the prefix Oct meaning 8]
3. Avaritia (greed) [Restimar who dived into the water to get a rest in the sea, was guilty of greed as were Caspian & Edmund arguing about the potential of water turning all things gold - just as you said. I've also read an article in which Islam mentions that Greed is the root of all sinfulness. 
4. Tristitia (sorrow, despair, despondency) [Now, this was an interesting sin, which has long since been dropped, or that is the impression I got, some 20 years ago. ITW connects this sin with Lord Rhoop, when the desires of the crew were often to meet again people they loved and lost, & the nightmare scenarios on Dark Island suggest the opposite would happen.
5. Ira (wrath) [Once we got to Aslan's table & the remaining 3 missing lords, ITW thought it was Revilian who wanted to go further east & picked up the stone knife. The commentator on ITW deduced this was the culprit by parsing his name. Well, of course Reveille, is the army word to get up of a morning when the Sun rises. 
6. Acedia (sloth) According to Into the Wardrobe, this had to be Lord Argoz who just wanted to go home, so therefore he was lazy, without appetite to go further. But because of the slovenly soldiers, & Governor Gumpas' collusion with slavery, I also thought the Lone Island adventure was a good fit.
7. Gula (gluttony) Now this one was Lord Mavramorn, our mustard eater, just wanting a good meal? At least I did get that one right. 
8. Vanagloria (vanity, vainglory) Apparently, this was Lucy's sin on the Dufflepud Island, whilst reading the Magician's book. It was also Susan's sin according to what C.S. Lewis had written in a letter. But in Walden's version of VDT, Lucy was asked by Aslan how long she had envied her sister. [Invidia or envy, in fact] I don't think that episode where Lucy got to listen in to her friend practically disowning Lucy to a more dominating girl, was in the Walden movie. And envy is a big theme in VDT, whether being sent off to Eustace's place instead of going to America like Susan. Or whether Lucy, herself, is being envied for having an albeit small room to herself, whilst Edmund is forced to share with Eustace, not at all prepared to make him welcome.  

Of course, there are the Opposite virtues for each book. In HHB, which I picked for Pride, the opposite virtue is for Humility, whilst for Silver Chair, the opposite virtue for Sloth is Perseverance. The other virtues include Temperance (for Gluttony), Chastity (for Lust), Patience against Anger, Charity against Greed & Kindness against Envy. There are also the 7 Heavenly virtues of Faith, Hope & Charity from 1 Corinthians verse 13, combined with the four classical virtues of Temperance, Justice, Prudence and Courage.

------------- 

@davidd Which is a mixed message (as there is more to intelligence than just your school grades).  Regarding Ramandu's daughter, we hear: ..Again, there is more to intelligence than merely wisdom, but what little information we have may indicate that Lilliandil / Ramandu's Daughter may have been quite an intelligent woman.

They carried the dead Queen back to Cair Paravel, and she was bitterly mourned by Rilian and by the King, and by all Narnia. She had been a great lady, wise and gracious and happy, King Caspian’s bride whom he had brought home from the eastern end of the world. (Quote from the Parliament of Owls in SC.

Quite so, when I agree in Narnia school results don't matter as much, as Eustace is brought to realise when he turned into a dragon, having found that all his airs and graces to boast about himself don't appear to matter very much.

But in this world, Susan's poor school results do actually matter, no matter how otherwise "grown-up" she seems for her age. Susan, is, of course, a fictional character, but Miss Conventionality, as I like to see her, would be on the back foot if her romantic bridal dreams didn't work out the way she'd have liked them to have done & if she never achieved so much as a basic Intermediate certificate to help her find work if she needed it, or even so much as 1 "O" level if in UK. I know from family experience, & from what work experience & careers information I received at school, that the minimum requirement for the library assistant job I first applied for was a good pass in the Leaving Certificate, which I managed. But I still had to do further education subsequently, both at Technical College, and later through distance education, a degree or two to be considered unequivocably as a librarian. 

Having said that, I do also realise that great jobs can be found in trades etc, with apprenticeship courses at TAFE, and that poor school results aren't the end of the world, when there are other ways to compensate for those who are really intelligent & who are prepared to persevere. Even in jobs in say, accounting, I knew of one hard-working young man who not only shone in his TAFE accountancy course but used these TAFE results to good effect in applying for a university place, even earning a University Medal. One 2004 author that @courtenay doesn't like at all, depicted Susan Pevensie (or Hastings) as an unmarried elderly Professor of Children's Literature, which I think downright unlikely without years & years of study, when surely to be a professor of anything, one needs to have at least a teacher's certificate or diploma to qualify for such a position, no matter how many literary people she might have been able to use for references & contacts, to get such a position. 

Posted by: @waggawerewolf27

When there are seven books in the Narnian series, it is tempting to allot each book to one or other of the seven deadly sins. We were going through HHB further up the thread, and when so many of the main characters were guilty of the sin of pride, that was the seven deadly sins I allotted to that book. For The Silver Chair, I allotted the sin of Sloth, when the opposite of Sloth is Perseverance. So how do we allot each book to a sin?

• Magican's Nephew=
• Lion the Witch & the Wardrobe-
• Horse & His Boy - Pride: How many people are proud, arrogant etc? Humility is the opposite virtue. Shasta & Hwin, for example.
• Prince Caspian =
• Voyage of the Dawn Treader-
• The Silver Chair-Sloth; Remembering & forgetting the Signs, Perseverence, nonetheless, as the opposite virtue. 
• The Last Battle -

To be clear, I do not believe the Narnia books are using the seven deadly sins / the seven heavenly virtues as a scheme for how they are written (I do not think C.S. Lewis had them in mind – but of course I could be wrong).  Just for fun, I can imagine:

• The Magician’s Nephew: Lust (Jadis's lust for power over her sister, the lust for the apple, the desire to save Digory’s mother no matter what)
• The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe: Gluttony (Turkish delight?)
• The Horse and His Boy: Pride (Aravis, Bree and Rabadash are all proud)
• Prince Caspian: Wrath (Miraz having Wrath on old Narnia, Nikabrik’s wrath once he loses hope – but really because this was the only one sin left, after I had already assigned the rest 😊)
• The Voyage of the Dawntreader: Greed (Dragon’s hoard, gold from gold water Island)
• The Silver Chair: Sloth (They keep getting distracted from their mission)
• The Last Battle: Wrath (The Rashness of King Tirian?)

Posted by: @courtenay

I wouldn't. I seriously wouldn't. I've said it before and I'll say it again: C.S. Lewis was adamant that his Narnia books were NOT built on any deeper scheme that readers are meant to decode somehow. He said that a number of times in different ways, and he decried the tendency of some readers to find hidden meanings in his and other authors' works that the author never intended at all. That's why Michael Ward's "Planet Narnia" thesis, for example, is totally wrong-headed — because it blatantly goes against all Lewis's stated intentions about his own works. If you accept Ward's theories, you have to believe that Lewis was lying about how he himself wrote (and didn't write). I for one can't do that.

I hope this is not too controversial.  Feel free to hammer me in responses below.  I was surprised when I joined Narnia-web (about a year ago) how strongly opposed to Michael Ward’s thesis people seem to be here.  Most of the comments I have read (not just from you Courtney, but also from others) have repeatedly said the thesis is obviously wrong and it goes against everything Lewis said.

I have some reservations about Ward’s hypothesis, but I thought he makes some interesting points and there does seem to be a reasonable substance to his theory.  (I suspect I will come across as a “Michael Ward disciple” as if I am around people who like the theory, I seem to be a hater and around people who dislike the theory, I seem to see nothing wrong with it.)

Today, I did a search on Michael Ward on this site to review the conversations (because I was curious if I had missed anything).  Reading through the comments, there was initially some people who liked this theory and people who did not like it, but the consensus seemed to be “whether you agree or not, it is at least worth reading what Michael Ward says as it is a fun, interesting and thought-provoking thesis”.  About 7-8 years ago, the discussion stopped and the only comments I see after that are those stating that this thesis is fatally flawed - and possibly dangerous.

See for instance:

Astrology and Narnia

What do you think about the Narnia Code

Planet Narnia

Reading through the comments though, I did not see any critique of the thesis that seemed to me to be ‘deal-breakers’; the debate was not 'won' so much as 'abandoned'.

As I understand it, the main arguments against the thesis are:

1. Lewis would never use astrological imagery in his Christian writings.
2. C. S. Lewis did not have a plan for Narnia when he began writing the books; therefore, he could not have a scheme.
3. Narnian was a ‘supposal’ not an allegory.
4. C. S. Lewis did not expect to write seven books when he started, therefore he could not have had the seven stars / seven planets / seven gods / seven days of the week / whatever-you-want-to-label-it in mind when he wrote the books.
5. C. S. Lewis complained that people invented histories of how his books were written and they always got it wrong, therefore this is one more ‘history’ of how he wrote these books and is therefore false.
6. The planets assigned by Michael Ward do not really seem to fit as well as he thinks it does and therefore, he is wrong.

By the far the best of these arguments is the last one.  The rest seem to me to be at least somewhat problematic for a number of reasons.

• Lewis would never use astrological imagery in his Christian writings.

C.S. Lewis wrote a science fiction trilogy about Dr Elwin Ranson who travels to other planets in our Solar System.  In the first book, “Out of the Silent Planet” he travels to Mars which is called Malecandra in the book.  I do not think it is controversial at all to say that throughout this book, Lewis employs martial imagery (in terms of mythology to do with "Mars" / "Ares" / "Tyr",  the god of war).  In the second book of the series, Ransom travels to the planet Venus, which is called “Perelandra”.  This book employs traditional Venus imagery.  In the final book, “That Hideous Strength”, several Oyarsars (I might have misspelt that, I do not have easy access to my copy of the book right now - the heavenly messengers of the planets) come to earth.  When they come, they affect the people on earth in a manner consistent with traits assigned to these gods in ancient mythology.  C. S. Lewis also wrote the discarded image in which he lamented that people no longer use the old view of the cosmos (with the seven heavens) for their literary imaginations.  As such, I do not think this is a strong argument.  Lewis did not want to participate in astrology, but it does look to me that he liked to use the imagery to communicate Christian themes in at least some of his books.

• C. S. Lewis did not have a plan for Narnia when he began writing the books; therefore, he could not have a scheme.

This seems to me to be a non-issue as again the exact same thing can be said about Lewis’ science fiction trilogy.  When someone asked Lewis how he wrote his books, he once said:

The Editor has asked me to tell you how I came to write The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe. I will try, but you must not believe all that authors tell you about how they wrote their books. This is not because they mean to tell lies. It is because a man writing a story is too excited about the story itself to sit back and notice how he is doing it. In fact, that might stop the works; just as, if you start thinking about how you tie your tie, the next thing is that you find you can’t tie it. And afterwards, when the story is finished, he has forgotten a good deal of what writing it was like.
One thing I am sure of. All my seven Narnian books, and my three science fiction books, began with seeing pictures in my head. At first they were not a story, just pictures. The Lion all began with a picture of a Faun carrying an umbrella and parcels in a snowy wood. This picture had been in my mind since I was about sixteen.

Given, people do not doubt that astrological imagery is employed in the three books of C.S. Lewis’s Science Fiction Trilogy, and these books came about by much the same writing approach as was used for the Narnias, I do not see why C.S. Lewis stating that he did not begin with a plan would prevent the Narnia novels from utilizing similar imagery – borrowed from Lewis's daily study – that he had utilized in his earlier works.

In a similar manner, people are fond of quoting Lewis when he said:

Some people seem to think that I began by asking myself how I could say something about Christianity to children; then fixed on the fairy tale as an instrument; then collected information about child-psychology and decided what age-group I’d write for; then drew up a list of basic Christian truths and hammered out “allegories” to embody them. This is all pure moonshine. I couldn’t write in that way at all. Everything began with images; a faun carrying an umbrella, a queen on a sledge, a magnificent lion.

The problem with using this quotation to say that Lewis was not doing anything like Michael Ward's thesis is of course what C.S. Lewis goes on to say:

At first there wasn’t even anything Christian about them; that element pushed itself in of its own accord. It was part of the bubbling.
Then came the Form. As these images sorted themselves into events (i.e., became a story) they seemed to demand no love interest and no close psychology. But the Form which excludes these things is the fairy tale. And the moment I thought of that I fell in love with the Form itself: its brevity, its severe restraints on description, its flexible traditionalist, its inflexible hostility to all analysis, digression, reflections and “gas.” I was now enamored of it. It's very limitations of vocabulary became an attraction; as the hardness of the stone pleases the sculptor or the difficulty of the sonnet delights the sonneteer. On that side (as Author) I wrote fairy tales because the Fairy Tale seemed the ideal Form for the stuff I had to say.

This quotation is about how the Christian elements of the books found their way into the books.  It is not a denial that these elements are there, only a denial that Lewis wrote with an agenda of making a Christian story.  When C.S. Lewis began to write, he did not intend to write anything particularly Christian, he was just looking to write a children’s story.  The Christian element of the story worked its way in as he went along.  If someone is to use this quotation to show that Lewis could not have any scheme in the book, because it was not inherent to how he wrote, they should also insist that any Christian ‘supposal’ in the book also can not be present, because Lewis did not originally intend it.  Lewis is clear, that the Christian ideas were not the original 'scheme' of the books.  And yet all seven books are Christian works.  Aslan is the central figure in the books, uniting all seven of them.  If Ward is correct (I am not saying he is), then the utilization of the seven planets to mediate the message of Aslan in Narnia would also be an element that worked its way into the story.  This element could have naturally worked its way into The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe – alongside Aslan and the Christian elements.

• Narnia was a ‘supposal’ not an allegory.

I think this argument is very easily disposed of.  If Ward’s theory is correct, Narnia is still a ‘supposal’ and not an allegory.  I am told that the Avatar movies are each being made based around the ‘elements’ of wood, water, fire, earth and metal (I have not confirmed that this is true).  These movies are not allegories and (assuming what I have been told is true) do, apparently, follow a scheme.

• C.S. Lewis did not expect to write seven books when he started, therefore he could not have had the seven planets in mind when he wrote the books.

I cannot find the quote, but I remember C.S. Lewis writing (I think in a letter) that he wrote The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe without expecting any sequels.  And later he said that when he wrote The Voyage of the Dawntreader, he thought it would be the last one.  The only reference I can find to this is a letter to Mr Higgins from December 1962:

When I wrote The Lion I had no notion of writing the others.

I am sure there was a longer quote, that went into more detail.  If anyone knows where the quote comes from (and can quote it) I would greatly appreciate it (as otherwise, I could be missing Lewis main point based on my poor memory of it).

Again, this seems like a non-issue to me.  Using Avatar movies as an example, no one knows if James Cameron will complete his series of movies or if people will lose interest before he finishes the series.  And yet, if it is true that they do follow a scheme, they will no less follow that scheme for being incomplete.

In another, more personal example, I recently generated an AI animation based on the Chronicles of Narnia.  When I began, I had no idea if I could complete any of it, or whether I would find it too difficult and give up.  After a couple of months, I figured I would start with The Magician’s Nephew and The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe (because The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe is the most well-known book and the Magician’s Nephew is the flavor of the month right now).  When I had just about finished the various elements for the first two books, I really couldn’t stop without doing the Horse and His Boy, because it was my favorite book in the series.  Once I had almost finished the first three books, I thought I would clean up the compositing (AI is terrible when you have too many characters, so it is easier to generate animations with a subset of the characters and then mask & composite the layers to get the full set of characters into a single animated shot – this masking and compositing process can take about ½ an hour per frame and when you have 150 frames for 5 seconds, the process can take a while), I thought I might as well generate animations for Prince Caspian while working on the compositing.  I grossly under-estimated how long it would take to mask and composite frames; consequently I had pretty much finished both Prince Caspian, The Voyage of the Dawntreader and half of the Silver Chair before I had finished cleaning up all the composites.  At that point, I figured, I might as well finish off The Silver Chair.  And then, once I had the animation for 6 of the books, why not go all the way and do The Last Battle too.  I had a very simple scheme – I wanted to generate an AI animation based on the Chronicles of Narnia.  But I did not have any idea if I would complete the whole thing for all seven books.

Again, if the imagery of the seven planets worked their way into the books, it would not be a great issue if Lewis had this element into the books and yet did not know if he would complete 7 books utilizing this imagery.

• C.S. Lewis complained that people invented histories of how his books were written and they always got it wrong, therefore this is one more ‘history’ of how he wrote these books and is therefore false.

I think this complaint is based on what C.S. Lewis wrote in his essay “Modern Theology and Biblical Criticism” (published 1967, but given Lewis death in 1963 was presumably written earlier) primarily in response to Rudolf Bultmann and his disciples in the liberal theological movement.  The quotations is as follows:

All this sort of criticism attempts to reconstruct the genesis of the texts it studies; what vanished documents each author used, when and where he wrote, with what purposes, under what influences—the whole Sitz im Leben of the text. This is done with immense erudition and great ingenuity. And at first sight it is very convincing. I think I should be convinced by it myself, but that I carry about with me a charm—the herb moly—against it. You must excuse me if I now speak for a while of myself. The value of what I say depends on its being first-hand evidence.

What forearms me against all these Reconstructions is the fact that I have seen it all from the other end of the stick. I have watched reviewers reconstructing the genesis of my own books in just this way.

Until you come to be reviewed yourself you would never believe how little of an ordinary review is taken up by criticism in the strict sense: by evaluation, praise, or censure, of the book actually written. Most of it is taken up with imaginary histories of the process by which you wrote it. …

Well, this made me p***k up my ears. Since then I have watched with some care similar imaginary histories both of my own books and of books by friends whose real history I knew. Reviewers, both friendly and hostile, will dash you off such histories with great confidence; will tell you what public events had directed the author’s mind to this or that, what other authors had influenced him, what his over-all intention was, what sort of audience he principally addressed, why—and when—he did everything.

Now I must first record my impression; then, distinct from it, what I can say with certainty. My impression is that in the whole of my experience not one of these guesses has on any one point been right; that the method shows a record of 100 per cent failure. You would expect that by mere chance they would hit as often as they miss. But it is my impression that they do no such thing. I can’t remember a single hit. But as I have not kept a careful record my mere impression may be mistaken. What I think I can say with certainty is that they are usually wrong.

And yet they would often sound—if you didn’t know the truth—extremely convincing. Many reviewers said that the Ring in Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings was suggested by the atom bomb. What could be more plausible? Here is a book published when everyone was preoccupied by that sinister invention; here in the center of the book is a weapon which it seems madness to throw away yet fatal to use. Yet in fact, the chronology of the book’s composition makes the theory impossible. Only the other week a reviewer said that a fairy tale by my friend Roger Lancelyn Green was influenced by fairy tales of mine. Nothing could be more probable. I have an imaginary country with a beneficent lion in it: Green, one with a beneficent tiger. Green and I can be proved to read one another’s works, to be indeed in various ways closely associated. The case for an affiliation is far stronger than many which we accept as conclusive when dead authors are concerned. But it’s all untrue nevertheless. I know the genesis of that Tiger and that Lion and they are quite independent.

I think this quote on the one hand should give us pause and indicate that care should be taken.  Any theory about Lewis writing can never be anything more than that unless we have strong evidence from what he wrote himself confirming or denying it.

At the same time, the quotation is about the history of how C.S. Lewis’s texts were written, not about their content.  Lewis, himself wrote literary criticisms of other writer’s works.  His prelude to Paradise Lost contained analysis of the book’s contents.  If the quote above means what I understand some people to think it means, then we should not be so arrogant as to analyze any text – as we may be noticing something random that appears deliberate and so impose on the author a scheme that historically they did not intend.

Taken to its logical conclusion, we cannot notice the introduction, body and conclusion of an essay because we do not know if the author really intended historically these textual structures to be present.  Authors often do employ literary writing techniques (as Lewis does in the original article that the quotation above is taken from where he uses a sheep metaphor for his ‘bleating’ against the pastors).  I do not think it is disingenuous to notice the repeated metaphor in the text and work under the assumption that authors write with intentionality, utilizing literary techniques to convey their ideas.  Again, Lewis, in evaluating poetry investigated the form and structure of the poems.  This is performing some level of analysis on ‘how the author wrote it’ as presumably the author intended the form that is written on the page.

In the above quote, Lewis, himself says:

Until you come to be reviewed yourself you would never believe how little of an ordinary review is taken up by criticism in the strict sense: by evaluation, praise, or censure, of the book actually written. Most of it is taken up with imaginary histories of the process by which you wrote it. …

C.S. Lewis did consider literary criticism to be a valid pursuit. To me, this raises the question, if Ward’s (or other theories) are critiquing the book in terms of the author’s supposed intentions - as later reconstructed - or whether they are dealing with the features observed in the text itself?  There is always going to be a little bit of both as you cannot notice a feature of the text without assuming some intentionality on the author’s behalf in including that feature in the text.

In the case of Planet Narnia (and the Narnia Code), Michael Ward is primarily focused on features that he sees in the text and the relations that he believes connects those features.  I realize, he does also describe how he thinks those features may have come about historically, though he is clear that he is doing conjecture at that point.  He may be incorrect in his analysis of the text, but I do not think this necessarily contradicts what Lewis has said about how he wrote these books.

EDIT: Just wanted to add that based on the above quotation, you could argue that all my points above are based on historical-reconstruction arguments and should be questioned by Lewis’s assertion. I actually think this is true, but arguments like ‘Lewis would not include astrological imagery in his Christian writings’ are equally historical projections of how people think Lewis might have thought and how his writing was motivated. To answer such questions does require some speculation based on what we have in his letters and other writings.

• The planets assigned by Michael Ward do not really seem to fit as well as he thinks it does and therefore, he is wrong.

I do not have any issue with this objection at all.  To some degree, I find Ward’s thesis compelling and reflecting what I see in the Narnian books, to some degree I find it misses the mark.  But it is at this point, where I think the debate is to be had.  If his analysis of the text matches what is actually in the text, then I think to that degree it should be embraced as helpful.  If his theory is inconsistent with the text written, then I think it should be abandoned.

Feel free to correct me if I have misrepresented the arguments against Ward’s thesis or left out arguments that bear on it.  Essentially, if I have misunderstood why people do not like this thesis, please help me to understand – as I do really want to.  And likewise, if the points above made are weak, feel free to shoot me down for them.

Posted by: @waggawerewolf27

I didn't realise that, when, prior to 16/10/2014, I actually did buy "The Narnia Code: C. S. Lewis and the Secret of the Seven Heavens" written by Michael Ward. I'm definitely not convinced about his matching up C.S. Lewis' Narnia series with the Sun, Moon & classical planets, as Michael Ward actually did do. I presume my kindle edition is just another title for "Planet Narnia" when I am aware that the same book can have different titles depending on which country in which it is being published.

The academic work was called Planet Narnia.  Michael Ward then wrote a more popular version of the same material under the name “The Narnia Code”.  They are two different books covering the same material, one more detailed, but dry and one more accessible.

Posted by: @waggawerewolf27

I never thought at any time that what I was doing was not mainstream, already, standard Christianity, when as far as I knew & learned as a youngster & when I was writing an essay for Scribbulus in August 2006. The 7 Deadly Sins were formulated from Pope Gregory 1, the Great's studies of the Old Testament book of Job, also present in the Tanakh (Hebrew Holy Scriptures, 1952 Harkavy edition) in a section called "Writings", consisting of Psalms, Proverbs, Job, Esther, Daniel, Song of Solomon, Ecclesiastes, Ruth, Ezra, Nehemiah, & 1 & 2 Chronicles.

Apologies. I meant that when I watch the videos from Into the Wardrobe, I did not realise that the practice of assigning one of the Seven Deadly Sins to the lost Lords was a main stream practice.  Having seen both the creator of these videos and yourself do it, I guess it is a more common practice than I realized.  I was not meaning that he or you is unorthodox in your theology.

@thef-maria The reason I always claimed that Ramandu's Daughter isn't a good queen is because she grew up in an isolated island with limited vision of the outside world and she also lived with the belief that violence is immediately punished by a sleeping spell.

Um, I believe that the three sleepers got into that state because one of them, either Lord Revilian or Lord Argoz, picked up the stone knife the White Witch used to kill Aslan, & which was set on Aslan's Table, according to my reading of VDT. It had nothing to do with Ramandu's Daughter, herself, or what she did or did not believe about punishing violence, & everything to do with the men's own behaviour, when in heated dispute. We know that it wasn't Lord Mavramorn, who, when partly aroused from sleep, asked "Mustard please". They weren't supposed to touch that knife. Mind you, sending quarrelsome people to sleep might be a good solution every now and then, particularly given current events.  

As for Ramandu's Daughter, when she was considered by the Parliament of Owls as having been a gracious, wise & happy Queen, she couldn't have been too bad as Caspian's consort in Narnia. Of course, by the time Jill & Eustace arrived at the Parliament of Owls, Caspian did have to rule on his own, in sadness & grief, which wore him down. Especially as he wasn't being helped by Rilian, his missing son, kidnapped by LOTGK, another C.S. Lewis character left nameless, though in French Medieval legends there is the character, Melusine or Melisande, who, if disturbed whilst bathing or birthing, would turn into a snake. The only romantic novel C.S.Lewis wrote was Till we have faces, where the beautiful sister of Orual was Psyche, not merely because of physical beauty. Psyche was the wife of Eros, the God of Love in Greek myths & legends. Perhaps when he wrote VDT, writing about Ramandu's Daughter, he already had Psyche in mind.  

As for Susan, Doug Gresham said in 2013, that for all we know about her subsequent life, after losing her whole family in a UK train crash, she might be a great-grandmother in America, somewhere near the college where he was a guest speaker on the 50th anniversary of C.S.Lewis' death in 1963. I rather hope she had married as it would be lonely to go through life totally alone without kindred. And I hope she'd learned plenty from her Narnia experiences, after all, when beauty doesn't last throughout life, & when whoever she did marry might not be any sort of prince or king, even if he vaguely looked like Caspian.

@davidd The Last Battle: Wrath (The Rashness of King Tirian?) - Quote 1

 Like me, you forgot Envy or Invidia. I thought the Last Battle was better suited to Envy (Invidia), because of Shift the Ape's envy of Calormene life with proper roads etc.

• C.S. Lewis did not expect to write seven books when he started, therefore he could not have had the seven planets in mind when he wrote the books.

Yes, that is true. He thought of finishing with VDT. But then he went on to write Silver Chair, & HHB, finishing with Magician's Nephew, a prequel, & then The Last Battle. So @courtenay was right, and I agree that Michael Ward's theory about Planets was going too far. 

Posted by: @thef-maria

The reason I always claimed that Ramandu's Daughter isn't a good queen is because she grew up in an isolated island with limited vision of the outside world and she also lived with the belief that violence is immediately punished by a sleeping spell.

I know we've had this argument before in a thread dedicated to it, but the fact is that we do not know for certain that Ramandu’s daughter "grew up in an isolated island with limited vision of the outside world". We are not told anything about her background or upbringing. We are certainly not told she has been on that island all her life, or that she has never had any contact with the wider world. She could have been born elsewhere — we don't know who, or what kind of being, her mother was, or where she came from — and only moved to the island with her father once she was an adult.

Lewis leaves her whole background completely mysterious, probably on purpose, so there really is endless scope for a reader's imagination to expand on her story, if one cares to.

As for "the belief that violence is immediately punished by a sleeping spell", that isn't what the book actually says. It says that the enchanted sleep fell upon the men because one of them picked up the Stone Knife, which was "a thing not right for him to touch". The lords weren't being punished for their violence, but for touching a sacred object — a taboo theme that is pretty common in myths and fairy tales. If they had simply hit each other with their fists, or drawn their own swords, then — well, we don't know what the outcome would have been, but it's probably safe to assume it wouldn't have been the same enchanted sleep.

(Edited because I originally wrote a few things at the end that could be taken as rude and unfairly personal — that wasn't good of me, and I apologise.) 

@courtenay This is the last time I will say anything on this topic and I actually saw what you wrote on the last paragraph and I am going to address it. Not that I was offended I just want to address it.

First of all about the chapter of the three sleepers, I think the stone knife is a metaphor of violence’s prohibition in Aslan’s Table, showing it’s a sacred place, just in a more subtle way. I Ramandu’s Island is working as a spellbound paradise and I don’t think it implies that Ramandu’s Daughter was even born or raised elsewhere. And this brings me to the end of this conversation which gets to this point that this entire conversation has been based on each one of us having speculations about this character about whom there’s no context at all. The mention of other people claiming she was a "great lady" may mean merely that she was nice to be around Caspian as consort and fits the fair and soft spoken medieval prototype of a proper and good queen. Who says that this prototype is good? Who says this was the truth about her? No one. So everyone can speculate. This is one of the reasons I realised I didn’t need to open this conversation in the first place. 

Just because my own personal image of Ramandu’s Daughter is this way does not mean yours has to be this way and the opposite is true as well. We have so little context of her that at this point, only speculation takes place. Your own speculation is that she is a good character and a worthy queen and my own is otherwise. I know my image can be a speculation and a mere image of my own and I never meant to force my ideas into your mind in any way. I am just ranting lol. My own speculation is that she’s too underdeveloped for Caspian, a bit irrelevant and not a good character. Who can 100% prove me right or wrong? No one. As I can’t prove you wrong.

If you want to believe that she had an actual personality and influence, go for it. I believe she serves mostly as a plot device for the silver chair book. And in my story she is exactly that, her pairing with Caspian isn’t to make the reader expecting them to kiss or to show its “true love”, it’s for Ellita’s character development. And at the very least something good came out of this in the end for me. And my speculations cannot be 100% true neither yours can because this is a 3 long pages character. And no a mention of her isn’t good enough for me as criteria.

Now if I come here and tell you that Lucy is a secret villain mastermind that wants to secretly destroy her family, of course it is nonsense and you can genuinely prove me wrong because this character has been into 3 books! Anyone can prove me wrong. How can anyone prove me wrong about a character on three pages without a name? No one. And this is why I am closing this conversation permanently and I’m never mentioning her again. If you want more of this please dm me privately because I don’t want this particular conversation to go in that direction again. 

Now I got to see your last statement and I’m just going to say that yes, I did have a huge crush on Caspian as a teen, now it is mild and more like an inspiration. But even as a teenager I never really was die hard jealous of every possible girl there was. I was actually okay with Susan. I always disliked Lilliandil from the movie  even as a character and then I still disliked her in the books. Even my mom does, she mentioned when we watched the movie together that she was “Too fake”. I’ve been spoiled with complex characters as a kid with watching Hunchback of Notre Dame 24/7 when I was 8 so don’t mind me, I’m always valuing actually structured characters 😭. Even now in 21 when I have a mild crush on Caspian a bit, (now it’s Sekiro from the video game though, sorry Caspian 😔) I don’t mind other female ocs with them as long as the story is good and as long as they’re not a bad character type. I also have made many ocs possible for Caspian. If a character like Susan was to be with Caspian fine whatever. But I personally don’t like Ramandu’s Daughter so yeah. Even as a kid when I had a small crush on Will Turner I loved him with Elizabeth, you know when I was a little kid and was more capable to be jealous. I still had some criteria. I’m not some delusional silly girl who tells people irl that Caspian is my boyfriend…! In my real life I simply say I want to stay single and then I go to collect cute pens. I do not take anything from my fictional universes into real life, it only has stayed here in this site. 

This is my conclusion. I will not mention Ramandu’s Daughter again, I shouldn’t have because it didn’t really stick to the topic and if anyone wants to continue it dm me personally. 

In the last Battle, there are a number of comparisons between characters where one character (usually Tirian) models virtue while other character(s) serves as a foil to that character.

The first comparison is seen in the “friendship” between Puzzle and Shift verses the friendship between Jewel and Tirian.

When we first meet Shift and Puzzle, we are told about the nature of their friendship.  Lewis makes it clear that Shift mistreats Puzzle, gaslighting him and taking advantage of the donkey’s naivety:

There were very few Talking Beasts or Men or Dwarfs, or people of any sort, in that part of the wood, but Shift had one friend and neighbor who was a donkey called Puzzle. At least they both said they were friends, but from the way things went on you might have thought Puzzle was more like Shift’s servant than his friend. He did all the work. When they went together to the river, Shift filled the big skin bottles with water but it was Puzzle who carried them back. When they wanted anything from the towns further down the river it was Puzzle who went down with empty panniers on his back and came back with the panniers full and heavy. And all the nicest things that Puzzle brought back were eaten by Shift; for as Shift said, “You see, Puzzle, I can’t eat grass and thistles like you, so it’s only fair I should make it up in other ways.” And Puzzle always said, “Of course, Shift, of course. I see that.” Puzzle never complained, because he knew that Shift was far cleverer than himself and he thought it was very kind of Shift to be friends with him at all. And if ever Puzzle did try to argue about anything, Shift would always say, “Now, Puzzle, I understand what needs to be done better than you. You know you’re not clever, Puzzle.” And Puzzle always said, “No, Shift. It’s quite true. I’m not clever.” Then he would sigh and do whatever Shift had said.

In Contrast to Shift and Puzzle, in the second chapter, we are introduced to Tirian and Jewel.  Lewis again introduces us to these two characters by telling us about the nature of their friendship.  In contrast to Shift and Puzzle, these Tirian and Jewel have a strong friendship and had saved one another’s lives in the war.

About three weeks later the last of the Kings of Narnia sat under the great oak which grew beside the door of his little hunting lodge, where he often stayed for ten days or so in the pleasant spring weather. It was a low, thatched building not far from the Eastern end of Lantern Waste and some way above the meeting of the two rivers. He loved to live there simply and at ease, away from the state and pomp of Cair Paravel, the royal city. His name was King Tirian, and he was between twenty and twenty-five years old; his shoulders were already broad and strong and his limbs full of hard muscle, but his beard was still scanty. He had blue eyes and a fearless, honest face.
There was no one with him that spring morning except his dearest friend, Jewel the Unicorn. They loved each other like brothers and each had saved the other’s life in the wars. The lordly beast stood close beside the King’s chair, with its neck bent round polishing its blue horn against the creamy whiteness of his flank.

A further contrast (really between Shift and Tirian) occurs with regard to the deception of Aslan coming to Narnia.  Shift creates the deception, manipulating Puzzle to dress up as Aslan.  Shift has no respect for Aslan; he does not believe in Aslan and is only too happy to deceive his fellow Narnians for his’ own profit:

“You look wonderful, wonderful,” said the Ape. “If anyone saw you now, they’d think you were Aslan, the Great Lion, himself.”
“That would be dreadful,” said Puzzle.
“No it wouldn’t,” said Shift. “Everyone would do whatever you told them.”
…
“Well then, that’s settled,” said the Ape. “You will pretend to be Aslan, and I’ll tell you what to say.”
“No, no, no,” said Puzzle. “Don’t say such dreadful things. It would be wrong, Shift. I may be not very clever but I know that much. What would become of us if the real Aslan turned up?”
“I expect he’d be very pleased,” said Shift. “Probably he sent us the lion-skin on purpose, so that we could set things to right. Anyway, he never does turn up, you know. Not nowadays.”

In contrast, Tirian cannot believe that anyone would dare to mock Aslan and lie about his coming.  Tirian is a true believer and is loyal to Aslan:

But last night the rumor reached me that Aslan is abroad in Narnia. Sire, do not believe this tale. It cannot be. The stars never lie, but Men and Beasts do. If Aslan were really coming to Narnia the sky would have foretold it. If he were really come, all the most gracious stars would be assembled in his honor. It is all a lie.”
“A lie!” said the King fiercely. “What creature in Narnia or all the world would dare to lie on such a matter?” And, without knowing it, he laid his hand on his sword hilt.

Later, Tirian is freed from where he was tied to a tree near Stable Hill by Jill and Eustace.  Tirian is loyal to his friendship to Jewel and after their first day’s rest, immediately sets out to stable hill to rescue Jewel, who is imprisoned at Stable Hill.  This plan involves navigating enemy territory and an encounter with Jewel’s guard (Tirian is risking his own life in order to free Jewel):

All three of them agreed that the very first thing they must do was to go back to Stable Hill and try to rescue Jewel the Unicorn.

…

“Art thou a warrior of the Tisroc’s, may he live forever? It cheers my heart to meet thee among all these beasts and devils of Narnians. Give me thy hand, friend.”

Before he well knew what was happening the Calormene sentry found his right hand seized in a mighty grip. Next instant someone was kneeling on his legs and a dagger was pressed against his neck.

“One noise and thou art dead,” said Tirian in his ear. “Tell me where the Unicorn is and thou shalt live.”

“B—behind the stable, O My Master,” stammered the unfortunate man.

When Jewel is rescued, Jill will also liberate Puzzle from the inside of the stable.  In Contrast to Tirian, to explain Puzzle’s disappearance, Shift immediately betrays his friend.  Shift blames Puzzle for dressing up as Aslan and asks the Narnians to murder him if ever they meet him.  Innocent Puzzle has never wronged Shift in any way, showing how despicable Shift’s behavior is to his ‘friend’:

“Yes,” said the Ape. “At this very moment, when the Terrible One himself is among us—there in the stable just behind me—one wicked Beast has chosen to do what you’d think no one would dare to do even if He were a thousand miles away. It has dressed itself up in a lion-skin and is wandering about in these very woods pretending to be Aslan.”
Jill wondered for a moment if the Ape had gone mad. Was he going to tell the whole truth? A roar of horror and rage went up from the Beasts. “Grrr!” came the growls. “Who is he? Where is he? Just let me get my teeth into him!”
“It was seen last night,” screamed the Ape, “but it got away. It’s a Donkey! A common, miserable Ass! If any of you see that Ass—”
“Grrr!” growled the Beasts. “We will, we will. He’d better keep out of our way.”

Another contrast that shows up in the Last Battle is between Rishda Tarkaan and Tirian.

When we first meet Rishda Tarkaan, he is introduced to us as a greedy and arrogant commander.  Rishda steals Tirian’s crown while Tirian is his’ helpless captive.  Though Tirian and Jewel turned themselves in and surrendered, Rishda boasts of the Calormenes’ bravery and skill in arresting them:

One of the Calormenes, who had a helmet instead of a turban and seemed to be in command, snatched the gold circlet off Tirian’s head and hastily put it away somewhere among his clothes.
…
“O Lord Shift, mouthpiece of Aslan,” said the chief Calormene. “We bring you prisoners. By our skill and courage and by the permission of the great god Tash we have taken alive these two desperate murderers.”

In contrast to Rishda, Tirian and Jewel kill two Calormenes when they are enraged at the mistreatment of the Narnian horse.  Tirian and Jewel do not think about their own lives in attacking the two Calormenes (and they will later rebuke themselves for attacking them without announcing their enmity).  When Tirian and Jewel turn themselves in, they give no thought to their own safety; they are only interested in being faithful to Aslan, whether they live or not.  They are truly selfless and brave:

When Tirian knew that the Horse was one of his own Narnians, there came over him and over Jewel such a rage that they did not know what they were doing. The King’s sword went up, the Unicorn’s horn went down. They rushed forward together. Next moment both the Calormenes lay dead, the one beheaded by Tirian’s sword and the other gored through the heart by Jewel’s horn.

…
“I who was King of Narnia and am now a dishonored knight give myself up to the Justice of Aslan. Bring me before him.”
“And I give myself up too,” said Jewel.

At Stable Hill, the Narnians ask Shift why the Calormenes are interested in Aslan.  Shift says that Aslan and Tash are really the same person.  Ginger, the cat wants to confirm that the Calormenes will agree with what Shift says.  Without missing a beat, Rishda Tarkaan affirms Shift’s lie.  Rishda shows that he has no respect for - or belief in - either Aslan or Tash.  He will continue the lie that Shift is an old, wis man, rather than an ape.  He will do what ever is necessary to manipulate the Narnians; his loyalty is for his own gain:

“Assuredly,” said the Calormene. “The enlightened Ape—Man, I mean—is in the right. Aslan means neither less nor more than Tash.”
“Especially, Aslan means no more than Tash?” suggested the Cat.
“No more at all,” said the Calormene, looking the Cat straight in the face.

When Rishda later confides in Ginger, he reveals that he does not believe in either Aslan or Tash.  Rishda boasts of this lack of belief as ‘enlightened’:

‘Noble Tarkaan,’ said the Cat in that silky voice of his, ‘I just wanted to know exactly what we both meant today about Aslan meaning no more than Tash.’ ‘Doubtless, most sagacious of cats,’ says the other, ‘you have perceived my meaning.’ ‘You mean,’ says Ginger, ‘that there’s no such person as either.’ ‘All who are enlightened know that,’ said the Tarkaan. ‘Then we can understand one another,’ purrs the Cat.

In contrast to Rishda Tarkaan, King Tirian truly believes in Aslan.  Saying that Tash and Aslan are one and the same is anathema to Tirian.  He also will not tolerate the lie that Shift is a human and not an ape.  He loves Aslan; He loves his fellow Narnians and he will speak the truth for their benefit knowing full well that he will likely suffer for what he speaks (as indeed he does):

Up till now the King and Jewel had said nothing: they were waiting until the Ape should bid them speak, for they thought it was no use interrupting. But now, as Tirian looked round on the miserable faces of the Narnians, and saw how they would all believe that Aslan and Tash were one and the same, he could bear it no longer.
“Ape,” he cried with a great voice, “you lie damnably. You lie like a Calormene. You lie like an Ape.”
He meant to go on and ask how the terrible god Tash who fed on the blood of his people could possibly be the same as the good Lion by whose blood all Narnia was saved. If he had been allowed to speak, the rule of the Ape might have ended that day; the Beasts might have seen the truth and thrown the Ape down. But before he could say another word two Calormenes struck him in the mouth with all their force, and a third, from behind, kicked his feet from under him. And as he fell, the Ape squealed in rage and terror.

Rishda Tarkaan has no loyalty for his fellow conspirators.  He is using Shift for as long as he needs him, but he reveals to Ginger that when Shift is no longer necessary, he will be eliminated.  Ginger is not phased at all by this arrangement.

‘Do you, like me, grow a little weary of the Ape?’ ‘A stupid, greedy brute,’ says the other, ‘but we must use him for the present. Thou and I must provide for all things in secret and make the Ape do our will.’

A bit of speculation: I wonder whether Rishda Tarkaan and Ginger are any more loyal to each other than they are to the ape.  They will use one another as long as they find each other useful.  If the Calormenes had conquered Narnia outright, Ginger’s deception would no longer be necessary and Rishda may have enslaved or killed the cat along with his fellow Narnians.  Once Ginger can no longer speak, the plot moves ahead too fast to see if Rishda Tarkaan grieves at all.  After Ginger, Emeth insists on entering the stable and Rishda has no choice but to reluctantly allow the noble young man to enter.

In contrast to Rishda, Tirian is loyal to his fellow freedom fighters.  When Jewel is captured (see above), Tiran goes into enemy occupied territory to rescue his friend.  When Eustace is carried to the stable by the Calorman, both Jewel and Tirian rush to try to save him:

A Calormene was running toward the stable door carrying something that kicked and struggled. As he came between them and the fire they could see clearly both the shape of the man and the shape of what he carried. It was Eustace.
Tirian and the Unicorn rushed out to rescue him. But the Calormene was now far nearer to the door than they. Before they had covered half the distance he had flung Eustace in and shut the door on him. Half a dozen more Calormenes had run up behind him. They formed a line on the open space before the stable. There was no getting at it now.

Even when the Dwarfs shoot the Narnian horses, Tirian insists on not killing his fellow countrymen in spite of their betrayal.  Tirian is faithful and loyal where Rishda is not:

Even Jewel said, “Shall I run after those Dwarfs, Sire, and spit ten of them on my horn at each plunge?” But Tirian with his face as stern as stone, said, “Stand fast, Jewel. If you must weep, sweetheart” (this was to Jill), “turn your face aside and see you wet not your bow-string. And peace, Eustace. Do not scold, like a kitchen-girl. No warrior scolds. Courteous words or else hard knocks are his only language.”

Finally, King Tirian and Rishda Tarkaan are compared in how they behave toward the one they worship.  Tirian is faithful to Aslan throughout the book, but Rishda Tarkaan does not even believe in Tash.  When Rishda discovers that Tash is real, he is shocked and immediately seeks to appease the god:

Then Tirian rushed upon the wretched creature, picked it up by the scruff of the neck, and dashed back to the stable shouting, “Open the door!” Poggin opened it. “Go and drink your own medicine, Shift!” said Tirian and hurled the Ape through into the darkness. But as the Dwarf banged the door shut again, a blinding greenish-blue light shone out from the inside of the stable, the earth shook, and there was a strange noise—a clucking and screaming as if it was the hoarse voice of some monstrous bird. The Beasts moaned and howled and called out “Tashlan! Hide us from him!” and many fell down, and many hid their faces in their wings or paws. No one except Farsight the Eagle, who has the best eyes of all living things, noticed the face of Rishda Tarkaan at that moment. And from what Farsight saw there he knew at once that Rishda was just as surprised, and nearly frightened, as everyone else. “There goes one,” thought Farsight, “who has called on gods he does not believe in. How will it be with him if they have really come?”

…
Rishda Tarkaan was giving his orders.
“Forward,” he said. “Take all of them alive if you can and hurl them into the stable or drive them into it. When they are all in we will put fire to it and make them an offering to the great god Tash.”
“Ha!” said Farsight to himself. “So that is how he hopes to win Tash’s pardon for his unbelief.”

The biggest contrast come when Tirian and Rishda Tarkaan finally meet their respective god.  Rishda Tarkaan, is terrified with a dreaded servile fear – and indeed Tash appears to have probably killed him:

A terrible figure was coming toward them. It was far smaller than the shape they had seen from the Tower, though still much bigger than a man, and it was the same. It had a vulture’s head and four arms. Its beak was open and its eyes blazed. A croaking voice came from its beak.
“Thou hast called me into Narnia, Rishda Tarkaan. Here I am. What hast thou to say?”
But the Tarkaan neither lifted his face from the ground nor said a word. He was shaking like a man with a bad hiccup. He was brave enough in battle: but half his courage had left him earlier that night when he first began to suspect that there might be a real Tash. The rest of it had left him now.
With a sudden jerk—like a hen stooping to pick up a worm—Tash pounced on the miserable Rishda and tucked him under the upper of his two right arms
…
The hideous creature vanished, with the Tarkaan still under its arm.

In contrast, Tirian is also afraid when he meets Aslan, but Aslan is also Tirian’s truest desire:

All turned. Tirian turned last because he was afraid. There stood his heart’s desire, huge and real, the golden Lion, Aslan himself, and already the others were kneeling in a circle round his forepaws and burying their hands and faces in his mane as he stooped his great head to touch them with his tongue. Then he fixed his eyes upon Tirian, and Tirian came near, trembling, and flung himself at the Lion’s feet, and the Lion kissed him and said, “Well done, last of the Kings of Narnia who stood firm at the darkest hour.”

The dwarf, Poggin, is compared to a couple of other dwarfs in the book.

When Tirian informs the dwarfs the Shift’s Aslan is a fake, most of the dwarfs throw out the baby with the bath water and decide there is no Aslan at all.  Griffle is the leader of this group:

“Now, Dwarfs, you are free. Tomorrow I will lead you to free all Narnia. Three cheers for Aslan!”
…
After a pause of nearly a minute a not-very-nice-looking Dwarf with hair and beard as black as soot said: “And who might you be, Missie?”
“I’m Jill,” she said. “The same Jill who rescued King Rilian from the enchantment—and this is Eustace who did it too—and we’ve come back from another world after hundreds of years. Aslan sent us.”
The Dwarfs all looked at one another with grins; sneering grins, not merry ones.
“Well,” said the Black Dwarf (whose name was Griffle), “I don’t know how all you chaps feel, but I feel I’ve heard as much about Aslan as I want to for the rest of my life.”
“That’s right, that’s right,” growled the other Dwarfs. “It’s all a plant, all a blooming plant.”
…
“You must think we’re blooming soft in the head, that you must,” said Griffle. “We’ve been taken in once and now you expect us to be taken in again the next minute. We’ve no more use for stories about Aslan, see! Look at him! An old moke with long ears!”
“By heaven, you make me mad,” said Tirian. “Which of us said that was Aslan? That is the Ape’s imitation of the real Aslan. Can’t you understand?”
“And you’ve got a better imitation, I suppose!” said Griffle. “No thanks. We’ve been fooled once and we’re not going to be fooled again.”
“I have not,” said Tirian angrily, “I serve the real Aslan.”
“Where’s he? Who’s he? Show him to us!” said several Dwarfs.
“Do you think I keep him in my wallet, fools?” said Tirian. “Who am I that I could make Aslan appear at my bidding? He’s not a tame lion.”
The moment those words were out of his mouth he realized that he had made a false move. The Dwarfs at once began repeating “not a tame lion, not a tame lion,” in a jeering sing-song. “That’s what the other lot kept on telling us,” said one. “Do you mean you don’t believe in the real Aslan?” said Jill. “But I’ve seen him. And he has sent us two here out of a different world.”
“Ah,” said Griffle with a broad smile. “So you say. They’ve taught you your stuff all right. Saying your lessons, ain’t you?”
“Churl,” cried Tirian, “will you give a lady the lie to her very face?”
“You keep a civil tongue in your head, Mister,” replied the Dwarf. “I don’t think we want any more Kings—if you are Tirian, which you don’t look like him—no more than we want any Aslans. We’re going to look after ourselves from now on and touch our caps to nobody. See?”
“That’s right,” said the other Dwarfs. “We’re on our own now. No more Aslan, no more Kings, no more silly stories about other worlds. The Dwarfs are for the Dwarfs.” And they began to fall into their places and to get ready for marching back to wherever they had come from.

In contrast, Poggin understands that the ape’s fake Aslan is a fraud while still acknowledging that the true Aslan is still real:

“Only me, Sire,” came a voice. “Me, Poggin the Dwarf. I’ve only just managed to get away from the others. I’m on your side, Sire: and on Aslan’s. If you can put a Dwarfish sword in my fist, I’d gladly strike a blow on the right side before all’s done.”

Later, in the new Narnia, the dwarfs are hard hearted and refuse to believe that they are anywhere other than in a stable.

“Dearest,” said Aslan, “I will show you both what I can, and what I cannot, do.” He came close to the Dwarfs and gave a low growl: low, but it set all the air shaking. But the Dwarfs said to one another, “Hear that? That’s the gang at the other end of the stable. Trying to frighten us. They do it with a machine of some kind. Don’t take any notice. They won’t take us in again!”
Aslan raised his head and shook his mane. Instantly a glorious feast appeared on the Dwarfs’ knees: pies and tongues and pigeons and trifles and ices, and each Dwarf had a goblet of good wine in his right hand. But it wasn’t much use. They began eating and drinking greedily enough, but it was clear that they couldn’t taste it properly. They thought they were eating and drinking only the sort of things you might find in a stable. One said he was trying to eat hay and another said he had got a bit of an old turnip and a third said he’d found a raw cabbage leaf. And they raised golden goblets of rich red wine to their lips and said “Ugh! Fancy drinking dirty water out of a trough that a donkey’s been at! Never thought we’d come to this.” But very soon every Dwarf began suspecting that every other Dwarf had found something nicer than he had, and they started grabbing and snatching, and went on to quarreling, till in a few minutes there was a free fight and all the good food was smeared on their faces and clothes or trodden under foot. But when at last they sat down to nurse their black eyes and their bleeding noses, they all said:
“Well, at any rate there’s no Humbug here. We haven’t let anyone take us in. The Dwarfs are for the Dwarfs.”
“You see,” said Aslan. “They will not let us help them. They have chosen cunning instead of belief. Their prison is only in their own minds, yet they are in that prison; and so afraid of being taken in that they cannot be taken out.

The tragedy is that these dwarfs never experience the new Narnia, because they are imprisoned in their own unbelief.  In contrast to these dwarfs, Poggin gets to enjoy the new Narnia:

The creatures came rushing on, their eyes brighter and brighter as they drew nearer and nearer to the standing Stars. But as they came right up to Aslan one or other of two things happened to each of them. They all looked straight in his face, I don’t think they had any choice about that. And when some looked, the expression of their faces changed terribly—it was fear and hatred: except that, on the faces of Talking Beasts, the fear and hatred lasted only for a fraction of a second. You could see that they suddenly ceased to be Talking Beasts. They were just ordinary animals. And all the creatures who looked at Aslan in that way swerved to their right, his left, and disappeared into his huge black shadow, which (as you have heard) streamed away to the left of the doorway. The children never saw them again. I don’t know what became of them. But the others looked in the face of Aslan and loved him, though some of them were very frightened at the same time. And all these came in at the Door, in on Aslan’s right. … There was Roonwit the Centaur and Jewel the Unicorn and the good Boar and the good Bear, and Farsight the Eagle, and the dear Dogs and the Horses, and Poggin the Dwarf.

The comparisons are fascinating as in almost every case there is a juxtaposition between selfish and selfless behaviour.  There is also a contrast in each case between those who love and follow Aslan verses those who do not.

Posted by: @waggawerewolf27

Like me, you forgot Envy or Invidia. I thought the Last Battle was better suited to Envy (Invidia), because of Shift the Ape's envy of Calormene life with proper roads etc.

Hmm, I think I’ll assign it to Prince Caspian.  Miraz envies his brother as king and kills him.  The Lords Glozelle and Sopespian each envy Miraz and kill him.  

But the others looked in the face of Aslan and loved him, though some of them were very frightened at the same time. And all these came in at the Door, in on Aslan’s right.…There were some queer specimens among them. Eustace even recognised one of those very Dwarves who had helped to shoot the Horses...There was Roonwit the Centaur and Jewel the Unicorn and the good Boar and the good Bear, and Farsight the Eagle, and the dear Dogs and the Horses, and Poggin the Dwarf.

You've done a marvellous job with this last of the books.   At this point in The Last Battle, I got a bit confused, as I thought some of these characters had died in the battle, whilst others survived the battle. You've made very clear the difference between how Shift the Ape operates in his so-called "friendship" with Puzzle, a very exploitative one, I agree. And it also seems that the likes of Rishda Tarkhan or Ginger the Cat are the worldly-wise types, also out for what they can get away with, using people's faith in Aslan or even Tash for that matter, to manipulate & dominate those animals at the Stable meetings.  

davidd  {"I thought the Last Battle was better suited to Envy (Invidia), because of Shift the Ape's envy of Calormene life with proper roads etc".} Hmm, I think I’ll assign it to Prince Caspian.  Miraz envies his brother as king and kills him.  The Lords Glozelle and Sopespian each envy Miraz and kill him.

But didn't you assign Prince Caspian to the deadly sin of Wrath? And what would you assign The Last Battle to? Originally, I assigned Prince Caspian to the deadly sin of Lust, because Miraz liked to suit himself, without taking much account of anything else. For instance, after he became firstly Regent, he took some responsibility for how Prince Caspian was to be educated. It wasn't until his Queen Prunaprismia was delivered of a healthy son, that Dr Cornelius was bound to warn Prince Caspian to flee for his life.  

@davidd  The Magician’s Nephew: Lust (Jadis's lust for power over her sister, the lust for the apple, the desire to save Digory’s mother no matter what)

• The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe: Gluttony (Turkish delight?)
• The Horse and His Boy: Pride (Aravis, Bree and Rabadash are all proud)
• Prince Caspian: Wrath (Miraz having Wrath on old Narnia, Nikabrik’s wrath once he loses hope – but really because this was the only one sin left, after I had already assigned the rest 😊)
• The Voyage of the Dawntreader: Greed (Dragon’s hoard, gold from gold water Island)
• The Silver Chair: Sloth (They keep getting distracted from their mission)
• The Last Battle: Wrath (The Rashness of King Tirian?)

Originally, I'd assigned Magician's Nephew to Wrath, instead. HHB is obviously about Pride and Humility. Remembering that even the Quran or the Hadith, forget which, said that Greed is for VDT, Greed for something or other is likely to be the basis of every other sin in the category, be it Greed for recognition, praise and comfort, not only food & money, then I'm happy to leave Greed for VDT. And I can't get away from Sloth and Perseverance for the Silver Chair. 

Yes, Envy would fit Prince Caspian, as you said. But what would you assign to LWW and the Last Battle?

Posted by:@courtenay

It can be amusing to play these elaborate games with the Chronicles and try to find supposed patterns in them … But considering how many times the author himself took pains to explain that that is not how he wrote and not how he wanted his books to be read, I can only conclude it's an extended exercise in Missing the Point Entirely.

I think there might be a misunderstanding here.  As I understand it, you are saying that the various ‘patterns’ I have listed in this thread are looking for some sort of secret scheme, or a hidden code within the Chronicles of Narnia.  I am not referring to any sort of secret code, but a simple literary technique.

The ‘patterns’ I am referring to mostly belong to a literary device known sometimes as ‘step parallelism’, ‘staircase parallelism’, ‘direct parallelism’ or ‘alternating parallelism’.  The names more-or-less refer to the same phenomena in literature, namely a repeating “A, B, C, … A, B, C, …” pattern that is usually used for compare and contrast.

Alternating parallelism is generally used in one of two contexts, either:

• over a short piece of text (like one or two sentences, E.g., Isaiah 65:21-22)

A  And they shall build houses,

    B  and inhabit them;

        C  and they shall plant vineyards,

            D  and eat the fruit of them.

A  They shall not build,

    B  and another inhabit;

        C  they shall not plant,

            D  and another eat. (Isaiah 65:21–22)

• or over a longer piece of text (for instance, the seven days of creation in Genesis 1, or 1^st Kings 19:9-18 – see below for more detail):

In both cases, this structure is not a hidden code in the writing, it is just a literary device that an author can use to construct a composition.

Since researching this a small amount in response to your comment, I found at least one commentator has stated (rightly or wrongly) that C. S. Lewis is using the shorter form of alternating parallelism in the Horse and His Boy, when Aslan says:

“I was the lion.” And as Shasta gaped with open mouth and said nothing, the Voice continued.
“I was the lion who forced you to join with Aravis.
I was the cat who comforted you among the houses of the dead.
I was the lion who drove the jackals from you while you slept.
I was the lion who gave the Horses the new strength of fear for the last mile so that you should reach King Lune in time.
And I was the lion you do not remember who pushed the boat in which you lay, a child near death, so that it came to shore where a man sat, wakeful at midnight, to receive you.”

(I have reformatted the above quote, to make the repetition more obvious.)  Looking at the quotation, there does seem to be a deliberate effort on Lewis’s behalf to have the repeating “I was the lion…” in the above text.

In his book, “Reflections on the Psalms”, C. S. Lewis shows that he is aware of this device.  He comments:

Their chief formal characteristic, the most obvious element of pattern, is fortunately one that survives in translation. Most readers will know that I mean what the scholars call “parallelism”; that is, the practice of saying the same thing twice in different words. A perfect example is “He that dwelleth in heaven shall laugh them to scorn: the Lord shall have them in derision” (2, 4), or again, “He shall make thy righteousness as clear as the light; and thy just dealing as the noon-day” (37, 6). If this is not recognised as pattern, the reader will either find mares’ nests (as some of the older preachers did) in his effort to get a different meaning out of each half of the verse or else feel that it is rather silly.
In reality it is a very pure example of what all pattern, and therefore all art, involves. The principle of art has been defined by someone as “the same in the other.” Thus in a country dance you take three steps and then three steps again. That is the same. But the first three are to the right and the second three to the left. That is the other. In a building there may be a wing on one side and a wing on the other, but both of the same shape. In music the composer may say ABC, and then abc, and then αβγ. Rhyme consists in putting together two syllables that have the same sound except for their initial consonants, which are other. “Parallelism” is the characteristically Hebrew form of the same in the other, but it occurs in many English poets too: for example, in Marlowe’s
Cut is the branch that might have grown
full straight
And burned is Apollo’s laurel bough,
or in the childishly simple form used by the Cherry Tree Carol,
Joseph was an old man and an old man was he.
Of course the Parallelism is often partially concealed on purpose (as the balances between masses in a picture may be something far subtler than complete symmetry). And of course other and more complex patterns may be worked in across it, as in Psalm 119, or in 107 with its refrain. I mention only what is most obvious, the Parallelism itself. It is (according to one’s point of view) either a wonderful piece of luck or a wise provision of God’s, that poetry which was to be turned into all languages should have as its chief formal characteristic one that does not disappear (as mere metre does) in translation.
If we have any taste for poetry we shall enjoy this feature of the Psalms. Even those Christians who cannot enjoy it will respect it; for Our Lord, soaked in the poetic tradition of His country, delighted to use it. “For with what judge-ment ye judge, ye shall be judged; and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again” (Matthew 7, 2). The second half of the verse makes no logical addition; it echoes, with variation, the first, “Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock and it shall be opened unto you” (7, 7). The advice is given in the first phrase, then twice repeated with different images. We may, if we like, see in this an exclusively practical and didactic purpose; by giving to truths which are infinitely worth remembering this rhythmic and incantatory expression, He made them almost impossible to forget. I like to suspect more. It seems to me appropriate, almost inevitable, that when that great Imagination which in the beginning, for Its own delight and for the delight of men and angels and (in their proper mode) of beasts, had invented and formed the whole world of Nature, submitted to express Itself in human speech, that speech should sometimes be poetry. For poetry too is a little incarnation, giving body to what had been before invisible and inaudible.

I like this quotation, because C. S. Lewis is using ‘pattern’ to refer to the shorter form of Alternating Parallelism in pretty much the exact same way as how I am using the word ‘pattern’ in this thread.  Admittedly, C. S. Lewis is here referring to Poetry, and you could argue that the poetics used in poetry are not equivalent to the poetics used in narrative.

Step parallelism has a long history of use in The Bible, in Medieval Romance Literature and in Fairy Tales – along with pretty much every other form of written genre.  C. S. Lewis was of course an Anglican who read his bible, he was a Professor of Medieval Romance Literature and the Chronicles of Narnia are written as children’s fairy tales.  As such, I do not think it unlikely that he would be familiar with this writing technique, nor unlikely that he would use it himself (if he wanted to).

To show some receipts (and to not leave the paragraph above without evidence) some examples may be helpful.

On the first page of the bible, we read about the seven days of creation.  There are 8 creative acts during the first 6 days of creation (1 creative act on days 1, 2, 4 and 5, and 2 creative acts on days 3 and 6).  Each creative act follows the general pattern of:

1 God’s Command: “And God said, “Let there be …”

2 Confirmation: “And it was so …”

3 Evaluation: “And God saw that it was good.”

4 Tag:   “And there was evening, and there was morning, that was the Nth day.”

Sandwiched in the middle of this structure, the first three days will contain a separation (light from darkness, water above sky from water below sky, land from sea) and God will name the things he created on the first three days (light called “day”, darkness called “night”, expanse called “sky”, waters called “sea”, dry ground called “earth”).

In the second three days, there is an extended description of what God created.  The extended description usually contains a statement that the various things are created “according to their kinds”.  The extended description also often contains a blessing – God blesses the sea creatures, birds of the air and humans to “be fruitful and multiple” and his blessing to humans goes further by saying “fill the earth and subdue it, rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals …”

This reading of Genesis 1 (commonly referred to as the Literary Hypothesis) is embraced by many theologians and pastors - you can read more about it online.

Similarly, in Genesis 2:18-24 we find, the narrative set out in an Alternating Parallelism structure:

A  God creates animals out of the earth. (2:19a)
B  God brings animals to Adam (2:19b)
C1  Adam names animals (2:19c-20a)
C2  No suitable helper amongst all of them (2:20b)
A  God creates woman out of Adam’s side. (222a)
B  God brings woman to Adam. (2:22b)
C1  Adam names woman (2:23b)
C2  Adam breaks out in poetry about woman being the best part of him or possibly about her being family – given the use of this idiom elsewhere in scripture. (2:23a)

The parallelism in this passage is clear that where the animals are not a suitable companion for Adam, Eve is most definitely a suitable companion – as the contrast of the two C2 segments make clear.

In the book of Judges, there is a repeated Alternating Parallelism pattern, often referred to as “The cycle of Apostacy”:

A  Apostasy (Sin/Idolatry): Israel turns away from God to worship local gods (Baals and Ashtoreths).
B  Servitude (Oppression/Judgment): God allows neighboring nations to conquer and oppress Israel.
C  Supplication (Repentance/Groaning): The Israelites cry out to God for help in their distress.
D  Salvation (Deliverance): God raises up a "judge" (a charismatic military leader) to deliver the people.
E  Silence (Rest/Relapse): The land has peace while the judge lives, followed by a return to sin after their death.
In this case, the repeated pattern shows the decline of Israel (the character of both Israel as a whole, and of the Judges that God uses to defend them, decline as each repetition occurs).

In 1^st Kings 19:9-18, we read of two encounters between Elijah and God:

A  Setting:    At cave & word of Lord Came (19:9a)

B  LORD’s question:    “What are you doing here Elijah (19:9b)

C  Answer:   “I have been very zealous …my life away” (19:10)

DThe LORD said (19:11a)

E  Three occurrences:

E1  Wind… not in the wind (19:11b)

E2  Earthquake … not in the earthquake (19:11c)

E3  Fire … not in fire (19:12a)

F  Sound of silence (19:13a)

A  Setting: at cave & voice came (19:13b)

B  Question:                What are you doing here, Elijah (19:13c)

C  Answer:   “I have been very zealous … away” (19:14)

D  The Lord said (19:15a)

E  Three occurrences:

E1  Anoint Hazael (19:15b)

E2Anoint Jehu (19:16a)

E3  Anoint Elisha (19:16b)

E1’Hazael kills (19:17a)

E2’Jehu kills (19:17b)

E3’Elisha kills (19:17c)

F  7000 have not bowed to Baal (19:17c)

In the context, the repetition shows twice that Elijah should not lose hope.  God is still working in spite of Elijah’s lousy circumstances.

In none of the above cases, is the use of this pattern a ‘code’.  It is simply a way of shaping the text to make the author’s point clear to the reader.  There are so many more examples of this device in the bible, but I think that is enough to make the point.

This technique is also used in Fairy Tales.

Perhaps the best examples are the simplest ones.  In The Three Little Pigs (which I had always considered a nursery rhyme, but apparently it is a short children’s fairy tale from what I have read today), Alternating Parallelism is used according to the following pattern:

A The wolf comes to a pig’s house.

B The wolf says, “Open the door and let me in!”

C The pig inside says “Not by the hair of my chinny, chin, chin”.

D The wolf says, “Right, then I’ll huff and I’ll puff and I’ll blow your house in”.

E The wolf blows on the house.

F In two of the cases, the wolf blows the house down, leaving the pig inside vulnerable.  In the final case the house was built strongly out of brick and stands firm to the wolf’s blowing.

This repeated pattern is used to communicate the main theme of the narrative.

In Goldilocks and the three bears, Goldilocks will test 3 bowls of porridge, 3 chairs and 3 beds.  In each test, we will get “too cold … too hot … just right”, “too hard … too soft … just right”.  It is the same literary device at work.

In the Gingerbread Man, the story uses the repeated pattern of:

                A The Gingerbread Man meets someone

                B That someone wants to eat the Gingerbread Man.

                C The Gingerbread Man runs away poetically saying, “Run, run as fast as you can, you can’t catch me, I’m the Gingerbread Man!”

This pattern repeats until the Gingerbread Man meets the fox who outwits the Gingerbread man (again through a repeated pattern of sinking more and more of the foxes body beneath the water to force the gingerbread man onto the foxes snout).  The final occurrence brings out the moral of the story.

In “The Fisherman and his Wife”, the narrative alternates between the wife’s demands at home and the fisherman’s visits to the magical fish, reinforcing the moral message through repeated, escalating actions.

In “Snow White” (the original Brother’s Grimm version): The evil Queen attempts to kill Snow White three times (bodice, comb, apple).  The structure alternates between the queen’s preparation and the dwarf’s warnings / rescue.

Alternating parallelism is also used in Medieval literature:

I have not read “Sir Gawain and the Green Knight”, but apparently in its Temptation/Hunting Scenes, the poem uses a thematic "extended step" structure by paralleling the three hunting scenes with the three seduction scenes. The third seduction scene steps up in intensity from the first two, mirroring how the fox hunt is more complex than the deer/boar hunts.  C.S. Lewis had read this narrative and made a reference to it in his 1947 essay “On stories”.

Beowulf employs alternating imagery (e.g., descriptions of light alternating with darkness, or treasure with sorrow).  C. S. Lewis and J.R.R. Tolkien were both members of the “Kolbitars” (Coal Biters), which read Icelandic and Norse sagas together, including Beowulf.  So C.S. Lewis was familiar with this text.

I could go further into more examples, but I hope this is enough to show that these ‘patterns’ are common throughout literature; they are common to the literature that we know Lewis read and the to the genre of literature that C.S. Lewis was writing.  More importantly, I hope this shows that Lewis could employ such writing techniques without these techniques amounting to a ‘secret scheme’ of some sort.  We can observe these features in the text as a simple literary device and discuss them without resorting to saying that ‘we have cracked the hidden code of Narnia’.  I am not saying that Lewis hid something in his novels; rather that I think he might have used a simple, common literary device that many other authors  have also used in parts of his stories.

Just wanted to point out that these observations should not be ridden off, apriori, with the assumption that they are grand schemes for understanding the books as an alternative to what is plainly written in the text.  To me, we might as well say that Lewis could never use onomatopoeia (“When it was almost dark Tirian heard a light pitter-patter of feet and saw some small creatures coming toward him”) because he had gone to pains to say that his stories were not allegories.  If I am correct, the comparisons shown by these patterns are not hidden, but a plain part of the text for all to see and nothing deeper than that.

With all that said, I could still be reading too much into the text when I noticed these things.  I might be seeing things that are not actually there.

Posted by: @waggawerewolf27

At this point in The Last Battle, I got a bit confused, as I thought some of these characters had died in the battle, whilst others survived the battle.

I am guessing the particular dwarf who entered with Roonwit and the others who died must have been killed earlier in the battle unlike the other dwarfs that the Calormenes took into the stable (or perhaps he even deserted the battle outright).  I think C. S. Lewis mentions this is to flag that in spite of the fact that this dwarf had compromised badly and helped to shoot the horses, he was nonetheless a follower of Aslans and could be ‘saved’ into the new Narnia.  Presumably this dwarf was fairly weak in character if he followed the crowd of other dwarfs who said that Aslan did not exist when he still knew Aslan was real.  I think Lewis included this to communicate that we should not be too quick to judge, but maybe I am wrong.  What do you think?  And thanks for the compliment re the analysis of The Last Battle.

Posted by: @waggawerewolf27

But didn't you assign Prince Caspian to the deadly sin of Wrath? And what would you assign The Last Battle to?

I was assigning Prince Caspian to “Envy” and leaving The Last Battle as “Wrath” and The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe as “gluttony”.  I was mostly keeping my original list unchanged.  I essentially went through the list of sins and thought about which book I thought each one fit best.  Prince Caspian was the last book left, and I forgot that I had assigned it to Wrath, so I just switched it to envy and then tried to think of a justification for it.  I’ll readily admit that ‘gluttony’ for The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe is kind of lame – Edmund seems to be guilty of glutinous desire for the Turkish Delight, but he is also lusting after being a future king, and has some pride associated with his imaginings of being king.  The Witch is constantly pouring out her wrath, turning creatures to stone and slaying Aslan, so I think almost anything could be chosen for The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe.  (As I say, I am having fun with this, I cannot actually defend any of these sins that I am assigning to the books.)

Posted by: @waggawerewolf27

Originally, I'd assigned Magician's Nephew to Wrath, instead.

Both Lust and Greed have a pretty expansive semantic range.  For instance, I have heard George Lucas use the term “Greed” to encompass pretty much any selfish desire.  I have heard people use the term ‘lust’ to refer to pretty each anything that you really, really want and have used it interchangeably for gluttony, greed, sexual lust, lust for power, etc.  I think the range of meanings makes both last and greed somewhat difficult to assign.  I thought The Magician’s Nephew had the strongest sense of desire in the book’s conflict, hence I assigned ‘lust’ to it.  Lust also works for Miraz in Prince Caspian though.

Posted by: @waggawerewolf27

Originally, I'd assigned Magician's Nephew to Wrath, instead.

I assume this is because of Jadis wrath towards her sister?  What were your reasons?

Posted by: @waggawerewolf27

Greed is for VDT. Remembering that even the Quran or the Hadith, forget which, said that greed for something or other is likely to be the basis of every other sin in the category, be it Greed for recognition, praise and comfort, not only food & money, then I'm happy to leave Greed for VDT.

That works.  Voyage of the Dawntreader is very episodic, with so much happening, that assigning greed to it makes sense. 😊

Posted by: @davidd

In none of the above cases, is the use of this pattern a ‘code’.  It is simply a way of shaping the text to make the author’s point clear to the reader.  There are so many more examples of this device in the bible, but I think that is enough to make the point.

I get the point, and I agree, I was at least partly misinterpreting what you were doing, and I'm sorry. (You don't need to give me a full dissertation on literary devices in the Bible, by the way; I majored in religion studies at uni. )

But I'd still rather just read and enjoy the Chronicles for myself instead of going into lengthy analyses of the structure of them... maybe it's just that I had to do too much of that sort of thing at high school level (not with the Narnia books, fortunately!), and it almost killed off my ability to read simply for pleasure for years. I don't know. But I appreciate that you are enjoying what you're doing and obviously getting a lot out of it, so I won't keep on interrupting. 

@davidd I am guessing the particular dwarf who entered with Roonwit and the others who died must have been killed earlier in the battle unlike the other dwarfs that the Calormenes took into the stable (or perhaps he even deserted the battle outright).  I think C. S. Lewis mentions this is to flag that in spite of the fact that this dwarf had compromised badly and helped to shoot the horses, he was nonetheless a follower of Aslans and could be ‘saved’ into the new Narnia.  Presumably this dwarf was fairly weak in character if he followed the crowd of other dwarfs who said that Aslan did not exist when he still knew Aslan was real.  I think Lewis included this to communicate that we should not be too quick to judge...

What you are saying is also a repetition & a comparison of what Aslan was saying in VDT to Lucy after she'd given into the temptation to eavesdrop on her friends at school, whilst reading the Magician's Book, to find the spell to make the Dufflepuds visible. It also mirrors what you are saying about the relationship between Shift the Ape and Puzzle the Donkey, when one is domineering, patronising & given to gaslighting those who might disagree. Whilst the other is intimidated into going along with whatever the leader says. Reading your painstaking references in your previous Last Battle comments you make it amply clear not only the contrast in their relationship with that of Tirian and Jewel the Unicorn, but also how Griffle was able to intimidate the other dwarves into going along with him, except for Poggin, able to keep a clear head & to quickly slip away afterwards. And yes, the dwarves who got locked into the stable were likely the ones who survived the battle, when once the dwarves killed the horses, neutrality was no longer going to be an option. 

@davidd I was assigning Prince Caspian to “Envy” and leaving The Last Battle as “Wrath” and The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe as “gluttony”.  I was mostly keeping my original list unchanged.  I essentially went through the list of sins and thought about which book I thought each one fit best.  Prince Caspian was the last book left, and I forgot that I had assigned it to Wrath, so I just switched it to envy and then tried to think of a justification for it

In August 2006 I was writing one of 5 essays for Scribbulus, when I saw a similar pattern between JK Rowling's seven "Defence against the Dark Arts teachers" in as many years & books, and the equally remiss 7 Missing Lords of PC & VDT. Later on, in April, of 2009, after Walden's Prince Caspian was released, I found out that a Dr Don King of Montreat College in North Carolina had also allotted VDT to Greed.

For Magician's Nephew, I wrote at the time, that it wasn't only because of Jadis' ruinous anger at being defeated but also because of Digory's own anger at the duplicitous Uncle Andrew. Even Polly has something to be angry about, when Digory hurt her, whilst ringing the bell, but later confirmed to Aslan she had forgiven him. Yes, I, too had assigned Gluttony to LWW, over the Turkish Delight, though I should talk when I have here, a delightfully hexagonal Turkish Delight Christmas box I keep for odds and ends, having polished off the lot since last December, when nobody else in the family eats it.   But at the end of LWW Aslan asks Lucy with her cordial, hovering over her badly injured brother, Edmund, "Must more people die for Edmund"? 

For Prince Caspian I did allot Lust, thinking of Queen Prunaprismia's newborn baby's lusty cries, which in Walden's 2008 film triggered Prince Caspian's flight to the Old Narnians. Also, Miraz' lust for power which caused him to murder his brother, and the tendency of some of the Pevensies, themselves, to follow the lusts of their own hearts. Even then, along with Dr King, I found that Sloth fitted Silver Chair, as did its opposite virtue of perseverance, which enabled Jill & Eustace to return Prince Rilian to Narnia just in the nick of time. 

Dr King from Montreat College argued that in this seventh book, Shift the Ape wanted to be as revered & honoured as Aslan has been and so plots with the Calormene  Rishda Tarkaan to change how Narnia is run. And how! Something like Lucifer, I'd imagine when it aroused an evil spirit to take over Narnia for itself. Tash! 

It isn't only the 7 Deadly Sins but also the 7 Opposing Virtues that must be taken into account. Such as, the Liberality & Hospitality of Aslan's Table in VDT, & on Coriakin's island opposing the Greed of not only travellers, but also of those Dufflepuds, again with a rather vain leader whom the rest follow almost slavishly. But what about Temperance, one of the 7 Heavenly virtues, something Eustace needed to learn about when he tried to smash the picture in Lucy's Bedroom? 

Opposing Lust (Exploitation) as a theme in both Prince Caspian & in Harry Potter & the Chamber of Secrets, both books also suggesting friendship as a theme, is the virtue of chastity or, more accurately, fidelity. Think of Trumpkin's fidelity to Caspian & that of Trufflehunter. Though Susan was the last to see Aslan, she can't be faulted for her desire to exercise Prudence, the Heavenly virtue, even when she unearthed the first reminder of where they were.

The opposite of Gluttony is discipline or abstinence (from Turkish delight for the rest of the year ), including the stale bread the White Witch gave Edmund to eat when he arrived at her castle. However, the Heavenly Virtue in LWW is all about Justice, undoubtedly. And in later years, Edmund the Just would be remembered for his sense of Justice, dearly bought.

The remaining Heavenly virtues are Courage, Faith, Hope and Charity. It takes courage for Tirian to still stand up for Narnia when it seems all is lost, to go against the crowd & to sing out for help as he did to Aslan when tied to a tree. The opposing virtue for Envy is Kindness, but when I made a table of all of them, I had HP & the Goblet of Fire in mind, with a definite theme of Competition in the Triwizard Cup, & not necessarily Dr King's allotment of LB to Envy, & his suggestion of Shift's makeshift "Tashlan" competing against Aslan, himself. 

That leaves HHB (Pride), opposed by Humility. I've got Charity (or Love) here as its Heavenly virtue. What could be better than the instant hopeful love for his missing son of King Lune, which so impressed me, contrasting with the arrogant indifference that the Tisroc showed his own son, Rabadash, set against his 18 other sons. (Though the Tisroc, himself, would be a great example of Greed, Gluttony, and Lustfulness, in my opinion, in acquiring so many sons, surely not all with the same mother). Silver Chair has already been spoken for but I used Hope for its Heavenly Virtue. Think Puddleglum and his determined Hope, however hopeless LOTGK painted their memories of Narnia. And that leaves Faith and Patience to oppose the Witch's Anger, & which Aslan rewards Digory with the apple to heal his mother in MN. 

Of course, both you & @courtenay are right. And many of these sins & virtues could also apply elsewhere. 

@davidd I am guessing the particular dwarf who entered with Roonwit and the others who died must have been killed earlier in the battle unlike the other dwarfs that the Calormenes took into the stable (or perhaps he even deserted the battle outright).  I think C. S. Lewis mentions this is to flag that in spite of the fact that this dwarf had compromised badly and helped to shoot the horses, he was nonetheless a follower of Aslans and could be ‘saved’ into the new Narnia.  Presumably this dwarf was fairly weak in character if he followed the crowd of other dwarfs who said that Aslan did not exist when he still knew Aslan was real.  I think Lewis included this to communicate that we should not be too quick to judge...

What you are saying is also a repetition & a comparison of what Aslan was saying in VDT to Lucy after she'd given into the temptation to eavesdrop on her friends at school, whilst reading the Magician's Book, to find the spell to make the Dufflepuds visible. It also mirrors what you are saying about the relationship between Shift the Ape and Puzzle the Donkey, when one is domineering, patronising & given to gaslighting those who might disagree. Whilst the other is intimidated into going along with whatever the leader says. Reading your painstaking references in your previous Last Battle comments you make it amply clear not only the contrast in their relationship with that of Tirian and Jewel the Unicorn, but also how Griffle was able to intimidate the other dwarves into going along with him, except for Poggin, able to keep a clear head & to quickly slip away afterwards. And yes, the dwarves who got locked into the stable were likely the ones who survived the battle, when once the dwarves killed the horses, neutrality was no longer going to be an option. 

@davidd I was assigning Prince Caspian to “Envy” and leaving The Last Battle as “Wrath” and The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe as “gluttony”.  I was mostly keeping my original list unchanged.  I essentially went through the list of sins and thought about which book I thought each one fit best.  Prince Caspian was the last book left, and I forgot that I had assigned it to Wrath, so I just switched it to envy and then tried to think of a justification for it

In August 2006 I was writing one of 5 essays for Scribbulus, when I saw a similar pattern between JK Rowling's seven "Defence against the Dark Arts teachers" in as many years & books, and the equally remiss 7 Missing Lords of PC & VDT. Later on, in April, of 2009, after Walden's Prince Caspian was released, I found out that a Dr Don King of Montreat College in North Carolina had also allotted VDT to Greed.

For Magician's Nephew, I wrote at the time, that it wasn't only because of Jadis' ruinous anger at being defeated but also because of Digory's own anger at the duplicitous Uncle Andrew. Even Polly has something to be angry about, when Digory hurt her, whilst ringing the bell, but later confirmed to Aslan she had forgiven him. Yes, I, too had assigned Gluttony to LWW, over the Turkish Delight, though I should talk when I have here, a delightfully hexagonal Turkish Delight Christmas box I keep for odds and ends, having polished off the lot since last December, when nobody else in the family eats it.   But at the end of LWW Aslan asks Lucy with her cordial, hovering over her badly injured brother, Edmund, "Must more people die for Edmund"? 

For Prince Caspian I did allot Lust, thinking of Queen Prunaprismia's newborn baby's lusty cries, which in Walden's 2008 film triggered Prince Caspian's flight to the Old Narnians. Also, Miraz' lust for power which caused him to murder his brother, and the tendency of some of the Pevensies, themselves, to follow the lusts of their own hearts. Even then, along with Dr King, I found that Sloth fitted Silver Chair, as did its opposite virtue of perseverance, which enabled Jill & Eustace to return Prince Rilian to Narnia just in the nick of time. 

Dr King from Montreat College argued that in this seventh book, Shift the Ape wanted to be as revered & honoured as Aslan has been and so plots with the Calormene  Rishda Tarkaan to change how Narnia is run. And how! Something like Lucifer, I'd imagine when it aroused an evil spirit to take over Narnia for itself. Tash! 

It isn't only the 7 Deadly Sins but also the 7 Opposing Virtues that must be taken into account. Such as, the Liberality & Hospitality of Aslan's Table in VDT, & on Coriakin's island opposing the Greed of not only travellers, but also of those Dufflepuds, again with a rather vain leader whom the rest follow almost slavishly. But what about Temperance, one of the 7 Heavenly virtues, something Eustace needed to learn about when he tried to smash the picture in Lucy's Bedroom? 

Opposing Lust (Exploitation) as a theme in both Prince Caspian & in Harry Potter & the Chamber of Secrets, both books also suggesting friendship as a theme, is the virtue of chastity or, more accurately, fidelity. Think of Trumpkin's fidelity to Caspian & that of Trufflehunter. Though Susan was the last to see Aslan, she can't be faulted for her desire to exercise Prudence, the Heavenly virtue, even when she unearthed the first reminder of where they were.

The opposite of Gluttony is discipline or abstinence (from Turkish delight for the rest of the year ), including the stale bread the White Witch gave Edmund to eat when he arrived at her castle. However, the Heavenly Virtue in LWW is all about Justice, undoubtedly. And in later years, Edmund the Just would be remembered for his sense of Justice, dearly bought.

The remaining Heavenly virtues are Courage, Faith, Hope and Charity. It takes courage for Tirian to still stand up for Narnia when it seems all is lost, to go against the crowd & to sing out for help as he did to Aslan when tied to a tree. The opposing virtue for Envy is Kindness, but when I made a table of all of them, I had HP & the Goblet of Fire in mind, with a definite theme of Competition in the Triwizard Cup, & not necessarily Dr King's allotment of LB to Envy, & his suggestion of Shift's makeshift "Tashlan" competing against Aslan, himself. 

That leaves HHB (Pride), opposed by Humility. I've got Charity (or Love) here as its Heavenly virtue. What could be better than the instant hopeful love for his missing son of King Lune, which so impressed me, contrasting with the arrogant indifference that the Tisroc showed his own son, Rabadash, set against his 18 other sons. (Though the Tisroc, himself, would be a great example of Greed, Gluttony, and Lustfulness, in my opinion, in acquiring so many sons, surely not all with the same mother). Silver Chair has already been spoken for, but I used Hope for its Heavenly Virtue. Think Puddleglum and his determined Hope, however hopeless LOTGK painted their memories of Narnia. And that leaves Faith and Patience to oppose the Witch's Anger, & which Aslan rewards Digory with the apple to heal his mother in MN. 

Posted by: @waggawerewolf27

What you are saying is also a repetition & a comparison of what Aslan was saying in VDT to Lucy after she'd given into the temptation to eavesdrop on her friends at school, whilst reading the Magician's Book, to find the spell to make the Dufflepuds visible. It also mirrors what you are saying about the relationship between Shift the Ape and Puzzle the Donkey, ...

You have some really good insights here!  I had not made the connection with Lucy’s friend being frightened of the older girl, or of Puzzle’s being intimidated by Shift.  That is really cool!  Of course, Lucy’s friend, who Lucy eavesdropped on really was Lucy’s friend – Aslan pointed out that she really did love Lucy – but her fear led her astray to say nasty things about Lucy.  It is very similar to this dwarf and Puzzle (I wonder what Aslan whispered to Puzzle, when he encountered him in the new Narnia, there must have been some love in it, given puzzle was so frightened of meeting Aslan).

…though I should talk when I have here, a delightfully hexagonal Turkish Delight Christmas box I keep for odds and ends, having polished off the lot since last December, when nobody else in the family eats it.

I became a little addicted to Turkish Delight after eating Cadbury Snack chocolate when I was a teenager.  (And a bit of a rant, related to nothing: Why is Snack, Old Jamaican, Breakaway, Marble, Top Deck, Cherry Ripe, etc.  not available elsewhere in the world?  I have only seen them in Australia, New Zealand and in Mumbai, India – they’re so good!  Over here, all we get are these chocolates with peanut butter in them – I do not understand it at all!)  Even today, I love baklava and other rose-water deserts.  So many people say that Turkish delight is not nice tasting, I think it is fantastic!

I found out that a Dr Don King of Montreat College in North Carolina had also allotted VDT to Greed.

I had a look at a couple of websites by Dr. King (one of which had a full essay that he had written on the subject). Maybe I need to invest more time in understanding his theory, but I did not find his take particularly compelling as he often references just a couple of events in some novels for his approach of assigning a deadly sin. It did not seem to me that the sin he assigned summed up the novel as a whole.

It isn't only the 7 Deadly Sins but also the 7 Opposing Virtues that must be taken into account.

Yes, I think that gives the assignments more credibility and makes the theme more wholistic in looking at any given book both as a critique of a seven deadly sin, but also as upholding the opposing heavenly virtue.  You have given this a lot more thought than I did.

The last pattern I think I spotted in the books is in The Last Battle. Again and again in this book, the villains will deceive the Narnians and bring them into bondage. In response to this deception, Tirian and his allies will attempt to expose the lie and end the manipulation. But their attempts always fail and make things worse in a manner that is frustrating and discouraging. But once the situation arrives at the point of despair, a final note of hope is raised, showing that Tirian and his friends should not give up yet. There pattern follows the general pattern of:

1. Deception: A villain will deceive the characters.
2. Doubt: The deception will lead to doubt amongst the Narnians.
3. Correction?: Someone will attempt to correct the deception.
4. Defeated: In spite of the hero’s effort, the deception is successful.
5. Hope: After the apparent defeat, there is still hope for the heroes.

The first instance I see of this pattern occurs when Tirian and Jewel are brought before Shift the ape:

• Deception: Shift tells the Narnians that Tash and Aslan are the same person:

“Baby!” he hissed. “Silly little bleater! Go home to your mother and drink milk. What do you understand of such things? But the others, listen. Tash is only another name for Aslan. All that old idea of us being right and the Calormenes wrong is silly. We know better now. The Calormenes use different words but we all mean the same thing. Tash and Aslan are only two different names for you know Who. That’s why there can never be any quarrel between them. Get that into your heads, you stupid brutes. Tash is Aslan: Aslan is Tash.”

• Doubt: The animals, trusting Shift, sadly believe what he tells them:

You know how sad your own dog’s face can look sometimes. Think of that and then think of all the faces of those Talking Beasts—all those honest, humble, bewildered Birds, Bears, Badgers, Rabbits, Moles, and Mice—all far sadder than that. Every tail was down, every whisker drooped. It would have broken your heart with very pity to see their faces.

• Correction? Tirian attempts to convey that Shift is lying to the Narnians to undo his deception:

Up till now the King and Jewel had said nothing: they were waiting until the Ape should bid them speak, for they thought it was no use interrupting. But now, as Tirian looked round on the miserable faces of the Narnians, and saw how they would all believe that Aslan and Tash were one and the same, he could bear it no longer.
“Ape,” he cried with a great voice, “you lie damnably. You lie like a Calormene. You lie like an Ape.”

• Defeated: Tirian is knocked down and tied up because of his outburst:

He meant to go on and ask how the terrible god Tash who fed on the blood of his people could possibly be the same as the good Lion by whose blood all Narnia was saved. If he had been allowed to speak, the rule of the Ape might have ended that day; the Beasts might have seen the truth and thrown the Ape down. But before he could say another word two Calormenes struck him in the mouth with all their force, and a third, from behind, kicked his feet from under him. And as he fell, the Ape squealed in rage and terror.
“Take him away. Take him away. Take him where he cannot hear us, nor we hear him. There tie him to a tree. I will—I mean, Aslan will—do justice on him later.”

• Hope: Though most animals are too fearful of the angry Aslan, some Animals out of love and loyalty to their king come to help Tirian:

When it was almost dark Tirian heard a light pitter-patter of feet and saw some small creatures coming toward him. The three on the left were Mice, and there was a Rabbit in the middle: on the right were two Moles. Both these were carrying little bags on their backs which gave them a curious look in the dark so that at first he wondered what kind of beasts they were. Then, in a moment, they were all standing up on their hind legs, laying their cool paws on his knees and giving his knees snuffly animal kisses. (They could reach his knees because Narnian Talking Beasts of that sort are bigger than the dumb beasts of the same kind in England.)
“Lord King! dear Lord King,” said their shrill voices, “we are so sorry for you. We daren’t untie you because Aslan might be angry with us. But we’ve brought you your supper.”
…
“Little friends,” said Tirian, “how can I thank you for all this?”
“You needn’t, you needn’t,” said the little voices. “What else could we do? We don’t want any other King. We’re your people. If it was only the Ape and the Calormenes who were against you we would have fought till we were cut into pieces before we’d have let them tie you up. We would, we would indeed. But we can’t go against Aslan.”

The next instance of this pattern occurs soon after the first.  When Tirian is tied to the tree, awaiting his fate:

• Deception: Tirian sees puzzle in lion skin walking out of the stable before the Narnians:

Then it went and bowed three times to the ground in front of the door of the stable. Then he got up and opened the door. And something on four legs—something that walked rather stiffly—came out of the stable and stood facing the crowd.
A great wailing or howling went up, so loud that Tirian could hear some of the words.
“Aslan! Aslan! Aslan!” cried the Beasts. “Speak to us. Comfort us. Be angry with us no more.”

• Doubt: Tirian wonders if Puzzle is Aslan and if Aslan is as mean as the Shift says:

From where Tirian was he could not make out very clearly what the thing was; but he could see that it was yellow and hairy. He had never seen the Great Lion. He had never seen a common lion. He couldn’t be sure that what he saw was not the real Aslan. He had not expected Aslan to look like that stiff thing which stood and said nothing. But how could one be sure? For a moment horrible thoughts went through his mind: then he remembered the nonsense about Tash and Aslan being the same and knew that the whole thing must be a cheat.

• Correction? Tirian begins to remember Narnia’s history:

He thought of his great-grandfather’s great-grandfather King Rilian who had been stolen away by a Witch when he was only a young prince and kept hidden for years in the dark caves beneath the land of the Northern Giants. But then it had all come right in the end, for two mysterious children had suddenly appeared from the land beyond the world’s end and had rescued him so that he came home to Narnia and had a long and prosperous reign. “It’s not like that with me,” said Tirian to himself. Then he went further back and thought about Rilian’s father, Caspian the Sea+farer, whose wicked uncle King Miraz had tried to murder him and how Caspian fled away into the woods and lived among the Dwarfs. But that story too had all come right in the end: for Caspian also had been helped by children—only there were four of them that time—who came from somewhere beyond the world and fought a great battle and set him on his father’s throne. “But it was all long ago,” said Tirian to himself. “That sort of thing doesn’t happen now.” And then he remembered (for he had always been good at history when he was a boy) how those same four children who had helped Caspian had been in Narnia over a thousand years before; and it was then that they had done the most remarkable thing of all. For then they had defeated the terrible White Witch and ended the Hundred Years of Winter, and after that they had reigned (all four of them together) at Cair Paravel, till they were no longer children but great Kings and lovely Queens, and their reign had been the golden age of Narnia. And Aslan had come into that story a lot. He had come into all the other stories too, as Tirian now remembered. “Aslan—and children from another world,” thought Tirian. “They have always come in when things were at their worst. Oh, if only they could now.”
And he called out “Aslan! Aslan! Aslan! Come and help us now.”

• Defeated: After praying to Aslan, Tirian has a vision of the friends of Narnia in England, but then awakens with nothing changed:

“It’s melting away.” “It’s vanishing.” Next moment he was wide awake, still tied to the tree, colder and stiffer than ever. The wood was full of the pale, dreary light that comes before sunrise, and he was soaking wet with dew; it was nearly morning.
That waking was about the worst moment he had ever had in his life.

• Hope: After Tirian awakens from his dream, Jill and Eustace arrive to help Tirian:

…

Almost at once there came a bump, and then a second bump, and two children were standing before him. The wood in front of him had been quite empty a second before and he knew they had not come from behind his tree, for he would have heard them. They had in fact simply appeared from nowhere. He saw at a glance that they were wearing the same queer, dingy sort of clothes as the people in his dream; and he saw, at a second glance, that they were the youngest boy and girl out of that party of seven.

The same pattern occurs again when Tirian and his friends encounter the dwarfs with the Calormenes:
• Deception: Soldiers lead dwarfs who believe they have been sent to the Tisroc’s mines by Aslan:

Then they set off in the direction of the drumming. It grew steadily louder and soon they could see torchlight as well. They came out on one of those rough roads (we should hardly call them roads at all in England) which ran through Lantern Waste. And there, marching sturdily along, were about thirty Dwarfs, all with their little spades and mattocks over their shoulders. Two armed Calormenes led the column and two more brought up the rear.
…
“O My Master,” said one of them, “we lead these manikins to Calormen to work in the mines of The Tisroc, may-he-live-forever.”

• Doubt: The Dwarfs repeat the lie that the Ape has told them:

“By the great god Tash, they are very obedient,” said Tirian. Then suddenly he turned to the Dwarfs themselves. About one in six of them carried a torch and by that flickering light he could see their bearded faces all looking at him with grim and dogged expressions. “Has The Tisroc fought a great battle, Dwarfs, and conquered your land?” he asked, “that thus you go patiently to die in the salt-pits of Pugrahan?”
The two soldiers glared at him in surprise but the Dwarfs all answered, “Aslan’s orders, Aslan’s orders. He’s sold us. What can we do against him?”

• Correction? Tirian shows the dwarfs Puzzle to prove that the Ape’s “Aslan” is a fake:

“Look!” said Tirian, pulling Puzzle forward into the light. “It has all been a lie. Aslan has not come to Narnia at all. You have been cheated by the Ape. This is the thing he brought out of the stable to show you. Look at it.”
What the Dwarfs saw, now that they could see it close, was certainly enough to make them wonder how they had ever been taken in. The lion-skin had got pretty untidy already during Puzzle’s imprisonment in the stable and it had been knocked crooked during his journey through the dark wood. Most of it was in a big lump on one shoulder. The head, besides being pushed sideways, had somehow got very far back so that anyone could now see his silly, gentle, donkeyish face gazing out of it. Some grass stuck out of one corner of his mouth, for he’d been doing a little quiet nibbling as they brought him along. And he was muttering, “It wasn’t my fault, I’m not clever. I never said I was.”
For one second all the Dwarfs were staring at Puzzle with wide open mouths and then one of the soldiers said sharply, “Are you mad, My Master? What are you doing to the slaves?” and the other said, “And who are you?” Neither of their spears were at the salute now—both were down and ready for action.

• Defeated: Once the dwarfs see that Puzzle is not really Aslan, they descide they do not believe in Aslan at all:

“Now, Dwarfs, you are free. Tomorrow I will lead you to free all Narnia. Three cheers for Aslan!”
But the result which followed was simply wretched. There was a feeble attempt from a few dwarfs (about five) which died away all at once: from several others there were sulky growls. Many said nothing at all.
...
The Dwarfs all looked at one another with grins; sneering grins, not merry ones.
“Well,” said the Black Dwarf (whose name was Griffle), “I don’t know how all you chaps feel, but I feel I’ve heard as much about Aslan as I want to for the rest of my life.”
“That’s right, that’s right,” growled the other Dwarfs. “It’s all a plant, all a blooming plant.”
“What do you mean?” said Tirian. He had not been pale when he was fighting but he was pale now. He had thought this was going to be a beautiful moment, but it was turning out more like a bad dream.
“You must think we’re blooming soft in the head, that you must,” said Griffle. “We’ve been taken in once and now you expect us to be taken in again the next minute. We’ve no more use for stories about Aslan, see! Look at him! An old moke with long ears!”
“By heaven, you make me mad,” said Tirian. “Which of us said that was Aslan? That is the Ape’s imitation of the real Aslan. Can’t you understand?”
“And you’ve got a better imitation, I suppose!” said Griffle. “No thanks. We’ve been fooled once and we’re not going to be fooled again.”

• Hope: After all the other dwarfs walk away, Poggin responds to the King’s call. Poggin is receives the truth without turning his back on Aslan and the King:

“Somebody’s coming after us, I think,” said Puzzle suddenly.
They stopped and listened. Sure enough, there was a thump-thump of small feet behind them.
“Who goes there!” shouted the King.
“Only me, Sire,” came a voice. “Me, Poggin the Dwarf. I’ve only just managed to get away from the others. I’m on your side, Sire: and on Aslan’s. If you can put a Dwarfish sword in my fist, I’d gladly strike a blow on the right side before all’s done.”
Everyone crowded round him and welcomed him and praised him and slapped him on the back. Of course one single Dwarf could not make a very great difference, but it was somehow very cheering to have even one. The whole party brightened up.

During the final night at the stable, the same pattern plays out again:

• Deception: Shift tells the animals that there is a donkey pretending to be Aslan and that Aslan is so angry he will not come out of the stable any more:

“Now listen, all of you. A terrible thing has happened. A wicked thing. The wickedest thing that ever was done in Narnia. And Aslan—”
“Tashlan, fool,” whispered Rishda Tarkaan.
“Tashlan I mean, of course,” said the Ape, “is very angry about it.”
There was a terrible silence while the Beasts waited to hear what new trouble was in store for them. The little party by the end-wall of the stable also held their breath. What on earth was coming now?
“Yes,” said the Ape. “At this very moment, when the Terrible One himself is among us—there in the stable just behind me—one wicked Beast has chosen to do what you’d think no one would dare to do even if He were a thousand miles away. It has dressed itself up in a lion-skin and is wandering about in these very woods pretending to be Aslan.”
Jill wondered for a moment if the Ape had gone mad. Was he going to tell the whole truth? A roar of horror and rage went up from the Beasts. “Grrr!” came the growls. “Who is he? Where is he? Just let me get my teeth into him!”
“It was seen last night,” screamed the Ape, “but it got away. It’s a Donkey! A common, miserable Ass! If any of you see that Ass—”
“Grrr!” growled the Beasts. “We will, we will. He’d better keep out of our way.”
“And after a horrid thing like that, Aslan—Tashlan—is angrier than ever. He says he’s been a great deal too good to you, coming out every night to be looked at, see! Well, he’s not coming out any more.”

• Doubt: Most of the Narnians believe Shift’s lie. The dwarfs are cynical and mock the ape, but they have chosen complete unbelief. Shift begins sending Narnians into the stable to kill them, one by one:

Howls and mewings and squeals and grunts were the Animals’ answer to this, but suddenly a quite different voice broke in with a loud laugh.
“Hark what the monkey says,” it shouted. “We know why he isn’t going to bring his precious Aslan out. I’ll tell you why: because he hasn’t got him. He never had anything except an old donkey with a lion-skin on its back. Now he’s lost that and he doesn’t know what to do.”
Tirian could not see the faces on the other side of the fire very well but he guessed this was Griffle the Chief Dwarf. And he was quite certain of it when, a second later, all the Dwarfs’ voices joined in, singing: “Don’t know what to do! Don’t know what to do! Don’t know what to do-o-o!”
...
“Ho-ho-ho,” chuckled the Ape. “Any more? Anyone else want to go in? Well, as you’re all shy, I’ll choose the next. You, you Boar! On you come. Drive him up, Calormenes. He shall see Tashlan face to face.”

• Correction? Tirian reveals that he is alive and that the ape has been lying to the Narnians:

“O-o-mph,” grunted the Boar, rising heavily to his feet. “Come on, then. Try my tusks.”
When Tirian saw that brave Beast getting ready to fight for its life—and Calormene soldiers beginning to close in on him with their drawn scimitars—and no one going to its help—something seemed to burst inside him. He no longer cared if this was the best moment to interfere or not.
“Swords out,” he whispered to the others. “Arrow on string. Follow.”
Next moment the astonished Narnians saw seven figures leap forth in front of the stable, four of them in shining mail. The King’s sword flashed in the firelight as he waved it above his head and cried in a great voice:
“Here stand I, Tirian of Narnia, in Aslan’s name, to prove with my body that Tash is a foul fiend, the Ape a manifold traitor, and these Calormenes worthy of death. To my side, all true Narnians. Would you wait till your new masters have killed you all one by one?”

• Defeated: In spite of Tirian exposing Shift’s lie, most Narnians do not respond to his call. Furthermore, the battle goes badly until Tirian sees, one by one, his allies are either dragged into the stable or killed until Tirian, himself is dragged into the stable:

“To me! to me!” he called. “Have you all turned cowards since I was your King?”
“We daren’t,” whimpered dozens of voices. “Tashlan would be angry. Shield us from Tashlan.”
…
“Dwarfs,” cried Tirian. “Come here and use your swords, not your tongues. There is still time. Dwarfs of Narnia! You can fight well, I know. Come back to your allegiance.”
“Yah!” sneered the Dwarfs. “Not likely. You’re just as big humbugs as the other lot. We don’t want any Kings. The Dwarfs are for the Dwarfs. Boo!”
…
A Calormene was running toward the stable door carrying something that kicked and struggled. As he came between them and the fire they could see clearly both the shape of the man and the shape of what he carried. It was Eustace.
Tirian and the Unicorn rushed out to rescue him. But the Calormene was now far nearer to the door than they. Before they had covered half the distance he had flung Eustace in and shut the door on him. Half a dozen more Calormenes had run up behind him. They formed a line on the open space before the stable. There was no getting at it now.
…
What made it hopeless, even apart from the numbers of the enemy, was the spears. The Calormenes who had been with the Ape almost from the beginning had had no spears: that was because they had come into Narnia by ones and twos, pretending to be peaceful merchants, and of course they had carried no spears for a spear is not a thing you can hide. The new ones must have come in later, after the Ape was already strong and they could march openly. The spears made all the difference. With a long spear you can kill a boar before you are in reach of his tusks and a unicorn before you are in reach of his horn; if you are very quick and keep your head. And now the leveled spears were closing in on Tirian and his last friends. Next minute they were all fighting for their lives.
In a way it wasn’t quite so bad as you might think. When you are using every muscle to the full—ducking under a spear-point here, leaping over it there, lunging forward, drawing back, wheeling round—you haven’t much time to feel either frightened or sad. Tirian knew he could do nothing for the others now; they were all doomed together. He vaguely saw the Boar go down on one side of him, and Jewel fighting furiously on the other. Out of the corner of one eye he saw, but only just saw, a big Calormene pulling Jill away somewhere by her hair. But he hardly thought about any of these things. His only thought now was to sell his life as dearly as he could.

• Hope: After losing the battle, Tirian finds himself not in a dark stable, but instead in the New Narnia. Ultimately, Tirian has not lost, his life ended in a faithful victory:

TIRIAN HAD THOUGHT—OR HE WOULD have thought if he had time to think at all—that they were inside a little thatched stable, about twelve feet long and six feet wide. In reality they stood on grass, the deep blue sky was overhead, and the air which blew gently on their faces was that of a day in early summer. Not far away from them rose a grove of trees, thickly leaved, but under every leaf there peeped out the gold or faint yellow or purple or glowing red of fruits such as no one has seen in our world.
…
Tirian turned last because he was afraid. There stood his heart’s desire, huge and real, the golden Lion, Aslan himself, and already the others were kneeling in a circle round his forepaws and burying their hands and faces in his mane as he stooped his great head to touch them with his tongue. Then he fixed his eyes upon Tirian, and Tirian came near, trembling, and flung himself at the Lion’s feet, and the Lion kissed him and said, “Well done, last of the Kings of Narnia who stood firm at the darkest hour.”
… all of you are—as you used to call it in the Shadowlands—dead. The term is over: the holidays have begun. The dream is ended: this is the morning.”
And as He spoke He no longer looked to them like a lion; but the things that began to happen after that were so great and beautiful that I cannot write them. And for us this is the end of all the stories, and we can most truly say that they all lived happily ever after. But for them it was only the beginning of the real story. All their life in this world and all their adventures in Narnia had only been the cover and the title page: now at last they were beginning Chapter One of the Great Story which no one on earth has read: which goes on forever: in which every chapter is better than the one before.

The repeated pattern seems to show that there is always hope in the midst of the dire circumstances. Even during all the horrible things that happen throughout this story, Aslan never forsakes Tirian and his friends. Furthermore, once we see the final repetition of this pattern, the book’s conclusion seems to indicate that Tirian’s steadfast faithfulness was the more important than the fact that his efforts ultimately failed to deliver Narnia from the invading Calormenes. Aslan is able to say “Well done” to Tirian for standing firm at the most difficult of hours.

I had thought about also looking at the “Deception / Temptation formula in The Magician’s Nephew”, but I feel like I have already brought it up – at least in part - in other threads (Wood between the Worlds, The Magician's Nephew A and The Magician's Nephew B), so while I could add a bit more detail, I do not think its worth repeating here.

Any thoughts?

I have more or less run out of instances where I have noticed any sort of parallelism utilized in the Chronicles of Narnia, does anyone else see any?

@davidd Maybe  I need to invest more time in understanding his theory, but I did not find his take particularly compelling as he often references just a couple of events in some novels for his approach of assigning a deadly sin. It did not seem to me that the sin he assigned summed up the novel as a whole.

Even at the time, by 2009, when I found that reference to Dr King of Montreat college online, I wasn't initially applying what he said to Narnia books at all, though he might have used the Narnia Chronicles even then for examples. I was still a member of the Leaky Cauldron Harry Potter fandom, and the 7 Deadly Sins, 7 Opposite Virtues & Heavenly Virtues I learned about from Catholic workmates & friends as well as online. There are also 7 Practical deeds such as Visit the sick, bury the dead, visit those in prison, to educate the ignorant? feed the hungry, clothe the naked and house the homeless - something along those lines. So, I didn't really think that Dr King's seeming agreement with what I had been thinking so far, & what I had been re-evaluating as well, was actually a theory at all.

The previous year, in March 2008, the year Walden released Prince Caspian, I wrote the last of my 5 essays for Scribbulus Issue 22, when I definitely needed a knowledge of these theological concepts to apply to my analysis of that HP Septet, a darker series than the Narnia Chronicles, & meant for an older readership, in my POV. 

1.Deception:A villain will deceive the characters.
2.Doubt:The deception will lead to doubt amongst the Narnians.
3.Correction?:Someone will attempt to correct the deception.
4.Defeated:In spite of the hero’s effort, the deception is successful.
5.Hope:After the apparent defeat, there is still hope for the heroes.

Yes, that particular pattern might well apply to earlier Narnia Chronicles, not only The Last Battle. 

Deception: 1. When the White Witch meets Edmund who then denies he had also been in Narnia with Lucy (LWW). 2. Miraz's using his regency of Prince Caspian to hide his murder of Caspian's father & to disguise his eventual grab for Kingship, probably starting seriously once he realised he was finally going to be a Dad. 3. In VDT: Pug's men at the Lone Islands, wanting to enslave Caspian & friends taking a stroll on the island of Doorn. Maybe also the Dark Islands. 4. The Emerald Witch in all her glory in SC giving deceptive hospitality advice about Harfang to deflect a tired, footsore, & hungry trio of travellers. 

Doubt: The deception will lead to doubt amongst the Narnians. 1. LWW - what about Lucy's family? Susan & Peter doubt Lucy. Edmund's continued belief in the White Witch puts him in danger. 2. PC- Nikabrik's well-founded suspicion of Midas & these Telmarines, but also of Dr Cornelius & neither Nikabrik nor Trumpkin still have much belief in Aslan. After the horn is blown, that meeting with Nikabrik & the Hag & Werewolf, with Trumpkin having not yet arrived back. 3. Despite their acquaintance with Aslan, everyone goes their own way. 4.SC - The travellers go to Harfang, having forgotten the signs, which puts them in danger.

3.Correction?: Someone will attempt to correct the deception. 1.MN Digory & Polly try to correct on their own the self-deception that deluded Digory into ringing the bell in Charn's Hall of Statues. 2.LWW - Having rescued Edmund from the White Witch, Aslan must make the Supreme Sacrifice to put a stop to the White Witch. 3. PC - Trumpkin arrives with Peter & Edmund, in the nick of time. Single combat between Peter & Miraz. 4. VDT - Lord Bern rescues King Caspian who then rescues the Pevensies & Eustace. The defeat of Gumpas & Pug's slavery business. The undragoning of Eustace, the Magician's book, Deathwater Island & the Dark Island & finally Ramandu's island. 5. SC. Jill's nightmare then their discovery of what danger they were in. 

4. Defeated?: 1.MN- Polly & Digory return with Jadis to Narnia, where they are given a mission to do. Jadis tempts Digory with one of the apples she is eating herself. 2.LWW Aslan's death, & Peter's & Edmund's possible defeat in the battle 3. PC - They might have been defeated but Miraz is killed by Sopespian & Glozelle when he trips over. Aslan sets everything to rights. 3. VDT - Caspian doesn't want to lose his friends, however, he has to complete his mission to release the sleeping Missing Lords, now including Lord Rhoop. 5.SC- They flee Harfang but then are made captive by the Earthmen. They are brought into the presence of a youngish man, who doesn't like the Emerald Witch (the Queen of the Underworld) being criticised. The youngish man AKA the Silent Knight has to be tied up after dinner of an evening, and as Jill, Eustace & Puddleglum watch, he calls on the name of Aslan. But then LOTGK arrives and tries to re-enchant the now quartet, into her own defeatist point of view.

5. Hope: After the apparent defeat, there is still hope for the heroes. 1.MN- Because Digory refuses Jadis' temptations, Aslan can sow the apple to grow the Tree of Protection, and Digory's hopes for his mother are realised when Aslan gives him an apple to heal his mother. 2.LWW - Aslan comes back to life and sets all things to rights, whilst the White Witch is finally destroyed. 3. PC - The battle is won; Caspian becomes King and the Pevensies go back to waiting for the train to take them back to school. 4. VDT - Caspian's quest is finished once he returns the now awakened 4 sleepers to Narnia, & he can look forward to a life with Ramandu's Daughter by his side. SC - Puddleglum puts out the Witch's green fire & then he & Eustace help Rilian fight the snake into which form the witch has become. Once the Witch is dead, the whole place unravels and Rilian gets back to Narnia - just in time.

@davidd   Yes, that pattern still applies to some extent throughout most of the rest of the Narnia Chronicles, though in The Last Battle the defeat is heavier, and the hope is not nearly so obvious to the betrayed Narnians. Least of all the Dwarves, unable to believe either Tirian or the Ape, locked in a world of "the Dwarves are for the Dwarves". I'll have to follow the threads you have indicated to see what you said elsewhere. I can't see any other patterns, either. 

Posted by: @waggawerewolf27

So, I didn't really think that Dr King's seeming agreement with what I had been thinking so far, & what I had been re-evaluating as well, was actually a theory at all.

Apologies, I might have misunderstood you there.  I thought Dr Don W King was presenting a theory that the ‘seven deadly sins’ are integral to understanding the construction of the Narnian chronicles, as set out in his essay in Narnia: Seven Deadly Sins.  Upon reading his essay, I was not convinced that it worked as that kind of explanation (similar to Michael Ward’s ‘Planet Narnia’ hypothesis).

Posted by: @waggawerewolf27

Yes, that particular pattern might well apply to earlier Narnia Chronicles, not only The Last Battle.

You’ve done an excellent job of finding this same pattern in the other Chronicles.  I was particularly impressed by how you saw it in “The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe” and “The Silver Chair”  Relating to those stories’ narratives as a whole.  As you say, the note of ‘hope’ is much higher in each of those cases.  (The resurrection of Aslan and the defeat of the White Witch, being the most obvious not of hope in the whole series.)