I wonder if Lewis addressed this point in any of his letters or writings. Maybe someone might of asked him if the Calormenes were supposed to represent a certain ethnic group or whatever.

No, Lewis didn't mean for it to be racist, most of the time people living farther south are darker skinned. As it is in Africa, South America and Australia and India.

That is a Northern Hemisphere perception. There are quite a lot of people who live in the South who aren't especially dark-skinned. Even those who have Aboriginal or South American Indian ancestry might not necessarily have dark skins.

I don't think that anyone asked C.S.Lewis about the Calormenes. He died in 1963, the same day as JFK, and most of the angst about racism tended to come after that. For that reason alone I don't see either HHB or LB as racist, certainly not intentionally racist. HHB is a book about escaping from slavery and from the point of view of such a Calormene slave, trying to escape, yes, Calormen would be seen in a negative light. That Shasta does not escape unaccompanied suggests that C.S.Lewis wasn't trying to paint any sort of racist stereotype.

Arsheesh isn't really a villain. He didn't let Shasta starve to death, and as despicable as it sounds to sell someone into slavery to make a bit of money, why not, when one is a peasant, and when Arsheesh's own life was little better than slavery anyway. Arsheesh does not sound a nice person but that is also what grinding poverty and no education does to people. And it does sound as if Anradin turned up out of the blue to buy Shasta. He may have had news of a boy who looked different from everyone else which might have become a liability for Arsheesh, if the villagers were also noticing this.

Slavery isn't confined to one particular nationality or ethnic group. Long before the Atlantic trade in slavery which brought African slaves to the Americas, and continuing afterwards as well, raids on the coasts of Ireland, Britain, itself and even Iceland brought slaves to other parts of the world. The Barbary coast was allegedly full of pirates and slave-traders. And transportation brought convicts to Bermuda, Barbados and other parts of America long before Botany Bay was established. Prisoners of war could end up as slaves, and there are many examples of slavery in the Bible. C.S.Lewis clearly was against slavery; does that make him racist, for describing the sort of country where slavery was permitted and expected? Or for describing its leaders in a negative fashion?

Rabadash behaved badly, it was true. And so he got turned into an ass. Anradin, one of Rabadash's cronies, was a bad master to have unless one is an expensively trained warhorse. And you can see clearly why Aravis would prefer to marry her father's scullion rather than Ahoshta. Since Aravis is of similar lineage to Anradin, Rabadash etc, was she being racist in any way to disdain having Ahoshta as a husband? What about Rabadash's descriptions of Susan, the lady he wanted to marry? Or the Tisroc's description of Narnians and Archenlanders? They chose to call the Narnians barbarians after all. Weren't they also a bit racist?

Unfortunately, whichever colour you decide to paint the Calormenes, you would have to describe Shasta and his Archenlander kindred as different from them so as to point out Shasta's situation, Arsheesh's disingenuous claim that Shasta was his son, and to emphasize the confusion between Shasta and Corin.

^ I don't know about "angst" over racisim, as I take it very seriously , but your comments on Areheesh are interesting.
I think Aresheesh could still be considered a minor villian. Yes, he is in a position that would explain why he is so cruel, but that doesn't excuse him. Many villians have motives and reasons behind their evil ways, but that doesn't excuse them. The same is true for people in real life.

haha, waggawerewolf27, how long does it take to write your immense responses? Every time, I post a response, you post an entire essay!

But, anyways, to clarify a point: I'm not saying that Lewis intentionally create racist stereotypes in CON. However, I'm saying that some parts will come off as racist at first glance, especially with the depiction of the Calormenes.

You said slavery is not confined to a particular ethnic group but in CON, it's the opposite. Only Calormenes are seen to actively support and engage in the trade. The only time the slave trade was seen in Narnia (the Seven Isles) was because it was allowed by a corrupt governor and the support of the Calormene of the trade. Sure, we can argue back and forth who was truly responsible for it, but in the eyes of the reader, it doesn't really give us a great impression of the Calormenes.

As for Arsheesh, he was a shallow, greedy, cruel man as the book said as much. He rescued a child only to later attempt to sell him to a tarkaan. Sure, Arsheesh was poor, but betraying a child, who have long thought him as father, for a quick buck? Such an act leaves a terrible impression of the man, poor or not. And seeing that he's our first impression of a Calormene, it leaves a bad taste in the mouth. The story goes on and we're introduced to a cast of Calormenes with only one of the main cast standing out as noble and good.

You confused me in mentioning the 'racist' Calormenes. Doesn't Rabadash's behavior just further cast more negative impressions we have against the Calormenes?

Once again, I don't think the books are racist, only that the movie could better develop Calormen's society as a rich, complex nation rather than just an evil regime of utter darkness against Narnia's purifying light. Of course, this might have been the whole point of Calormen but I really think it might be better to balance the two different perspective of Rabadash's, the Tisroc, the Tarkaan, Arsheesh with more good, noble Calormenes like Aravis. Doing this can ease off the misconceptions people might have against this series.

I never once thought that the Calorman's were responsible for the slave trade on the Lone Islands, that had never even occurred to me. I think a first-time reading will make you think that it was just the selfishness of certain "businessmen" and the weakness of the governors.

Sorry, I meant to say it's more of an offspring of the Calormen's slave trade as it was definitely supported by the Calormenes as seen during Caspian's discussion with Lord Bern on the possibility of war between Calormen and Narnia because of the closing of the slave market in VODT.

You said slavery is not confined to a particular ethnic group but in CON, it's the opposite. Only Calormenes are seen to actively support and engage in the trade. The only time the slave trade was seen in Narnia (the Seven Isles) was because it was allowed by a corrupt governor and the support of the Calormene of the trade. Sure, we can argue back and forth who was truly responsible for it, but in the eyes of the reader, it doesn't really give us a great impression of the Calormenes.

Yes, the Calormenes do support slavery. And I agree that is their major drawback, marring an otherwise rich, and vibrant human civilization. The trouble is with a story book world is that it is sometimes limited to two or three countries and their animosities to each other. But throughout real world history there have been many other countries just like Calormen. Including pre Civil War USA, Ancient Rome, the Ottoman Empire, and many others. In short, anywhere where those who are less important must give way to those who think they are more important, because of wealth, lineage, ethnicity or membership of a particular group.

We are told elsewhere in the CON that Narnia is a free country inhabited by talking animals and mythical beings, a country for humans to lead but not enslave. And when in LB this situation changes, Narnia ceases to exist. Archenland, inhabited by the peaceful last descendants of King Frank and Queen Helen tends to be a buffer zone between Narnia and Calormen, which was finally destroyed when the Calormenes infiltrated Narnia.

Calormenes aren't the worst people that C.S.Lewis invented for his world of Narnia. Prior to the arrival in Telmar of South Seas pirates, the outlaw Calormenes who lived there were far worse, according to companion books and mentions in C.S.Lewis' other writings. In Charn, in MN, slavery was not only supported but taken for granted by the relatives of Jadis. What LOTGK was doing down in the Underland, in SC, was another sort of slavery. So it is also wrong to say that the Calormenes were the only people in CON who supported slavery.

I hope this isn't your idea of an essay. Most essays I've been obliged to do have been up to 10 pages long, not always in English.

^ I don't know about "angst" over racisim, as I take it very seriously , but your comments on Areheesh are interesting.
I think Aresheesh could still be considered a minor villian. Yes, he is in a position that would explain why he is so cruel, but that doesn't excuse him. Many villians have motives and reasons behind their evil ways, but that doesn't excuse them. The same is true for people in real life.

C.S.Lewis died November 1963, just three months after Martin Luther King Jr's 'I have a dream' speech of 28th August 1963. Much as people deplored segregation or racism then, today's disapproving attitudes to racism and all its implications, only developed subsequent to 1963. I should know. As a schoolgirl then, I watched from afar whilst events unfolded.

I find it significant that it was Aslan, himself, who pushed Shasta into Arsheesh's waiting arms, and that Aslan did not pass judgement on Arsheesh to Shasta. Why, I wonder? Do you think that Aslan approved or disapproved that Shasta took the chance to escape his Calormene life?

Despite his own poverty, Arsheesh took up the challenge. As someone who was one of the lower class in Calormen he reared Shasta much as he, himself, was reared, that is to say, to contribute to family income and not to be a financial liability. In the real world, in poor, undertrodden countries, when famine hits, we don't pass judgement on those parents who sell their children into slavery rather than see them or their siblings die at home. And Shasta was in any case not Arsheesh's own flesh and blood.

Don't forget that in Calormen, the traffic rule is that everyone who is less important has to get out of the way of those who are more important. Could you say, let alone write an essay on, what would have happened to Arsheesh if he had refused to sell Shasta to Anradin, a gorgeously attired and self-important Tarkaan?

The issues of Calormen are human issues, which need to be depicted in any film adaptation of either HHB or LB, or MN and SC as well. C.S Lewis clearly regarded slavery as abominable, and also the sinful exploitation of man by man in any shape or form. Why should that make of Calormen a racist place?

I think people who run around looking for things they can call racist in classic novels are doing so not because they truly care about racism and getting along better with other people. I think they're motivated by a desire to tear down and destroy things because they are not skilled or talented enough to produce something of equal or greater worth. You rarely ever read a cool and calm discussion of perceived racism. Instead we get bitter, angry rants about how horrible the books are and how children shouldn't be allowed to read them. Phillip Pullman comes to mind, as well as pretty much anyone I've ever come across who has a problem with the Little House books. Funny how these are the same people clamoring around Banned Books week and having attacks of the vapors over someone not wanting sex-laden novels in elementary schools.

I think Savber is right, the quickest way to hush at least some of the whinging is to just promote a few of these referenced but never seen Calormenes to speaking parts. Let us see the people in Aravis' home who help her escape. Let us see more people in the capital besides Las and the villains. Will it shut everyone up? No, but it'll make it harder for them.

I think that comportment might show how terrified the general run of ordinary people were of their rulers without their saying a word. Even Arsheesh would have been scared of Anradin, whilst Lasaraleen was absolutely terrified of the Tisroc, in particular, for all her boasting. If you do give some of the good guys something to say, I'd imagine they would be very guarded in their speech.

Edmund said it all when he upbraided Shasta for 'keeping mum' and for 'hanging his head like a Calormene slave'. He should have realised that the real Corin never needed to be like that.

I don't think there would be any harm in including a few more nice Calormenes, although I wonder if the film makers will instead take the opposite approach and remove some evil Calormenes? I think that would be a bad move from an adaptation perspective, but I can see the film makers being tempted to do this. (Note to film makers, if I've just given you a great idea, DON'T DO IT!!!)

Are we meant to believe that the slave traders in Narrowhaven in VDT are Calormen? If so, I don't think there was a problem with them being depicted as Middle Eastern (at least I have yet to hear of anything).

Look at PC: they had the bad guys be of Spanish descent, but kept Caspian as a "good Spanish guy". In HHB, Aravis is the "good middle eastern girl", so I think that one will be okay. In LB, as long as they clarify that it was the actions of the people (betraying Aslan, etc.) that mad them bad, it will be okay. (Remember the one who wanted to see Tash but turned to Aslan and he was saved?)

I am very hopeful.

(What I mean is, by having those people be good, we are no longer classifying by skin color but by character and actions.)

Lucy of Narnia said:

Look at PC: they had the bad guys be of Spanish descent, but kept Caspian as a "good Spanish guy". In HHB, Aravis is the "good middle eastern girl", so I think that one will be okay. In LB, as long as they clarify that it was the actions of the people (betraying Aslan, etc.) that mad them bad, it will be okay. (Remember the one who wanted to see Tash but turned to Aslan and he was saved?)

But I think that's just it. In this day and age, people aren't as quick to accuse one of being prejudiced against those of Spanish descent. But modern society is very quick to attack those who belittle or make racial remarks against those who are Middle Easter. I do agree, however, it's all in how the "good" "bad" characters, if you will, are portrayed in the films.