It is inexcusable to leave children as young as Gael with any babysitters in anything less than emergency or dire situations for anything more than a few hours. I wouldn't do it, and I didn't do that. Gael and Rhince were after her mother weren't they?

And even if the dire situation is to keep a necessary job, I'd still take a good deal of care to vet the child-minding centre, if I couldn't appeal to family members as clearly Edmund and Lucy's parent must have done. Sometimes the alleged solution is worse than the problem. I've been in boarding schools. Like C.S.Lewis. And if the school is like Experiment House, a child may as well be in battle.

Did you know that many convicts were sent out to Australia never to see their families in England ever again? Did you know that some convicts did try to keep their families with them? And did you know that going out to Botany Bay was quite as dangerous as the Dark Island business in 1788 and for many years, decades and centuries later?

He was supposed to be lookout, wasn't he? This is something even a pacifist person might be willing to do.

Nope, Eustace was supposed to be a guard. Guards have weapons and need to be able to fight if need be.

In those days punishment was mainly of the short, sharp and physical variety, I have to admit. Cane first and ask questions later. And if you think disobedience was to be punished, then yes, she would have got corporal punisment.

Why were you sarcastically suggesting it earlier, then? Edmund received corporal punishment in LWW, and that movie was rated PG.

And yeah, I got a bit of corporal punishment when I was young, too. It hurts, but it makes you learn real fast.

And no, they should not have marooned Gael anywhere. Now that would really be unethical. As Harry Potter would say in DH (the book), parents should not leave their children unless they can't really help it.

But this a perfect example of a time when Rhince can't really help it? What sort of parent would bring their young daughter to war with them?

It is inexcusable to leave children as young as Gael with any babysitters in anything less than emergency or dire situations for anything more than a few hours.

That's exactly what the situation was. Their plan was to go into the Dark Island, get the sword, and get out as soon as possible.

Did you know that many convicts were sent out to Australia never to see their families in England ever again?

Well...they were convicts.

So it's excusable to take small children into deadly danger for no good reason, when there is an entirely safe alternative that won't require any extra effort to pursue. Good to know. Don't think I'd ever want someone who thinks that babysitting any children.

This is not the real world. This is Narnia. In Narnia, kids fight wars. Remember Movie!Lucy is actually older than Book!Lucy. One could argue that it was terrible to take her on such a dangerous mission. True, Lucy had already been a queen for many years. But Narnia is centered around children doing things we would consider unsafe. Queen Lucy didn't start out as Queen Lucy. She wasn't much older than Gael when the events of LWW took place. She became a co-ruler of Narnia when she was about Gael's age.

If Book!Caspian had been presented with Movie!Caspian's situation and whether he ought to take Gael on the mission, I doubt he would've made her stay. He wasn't much older than she when he had to flee his own home for the sake of his life.

In the Narnia books, children do dangerous things all the time and no one gives it a second thought. Why is there such a huge double standard when it comes to the movie? No, Gael is not a character C.S. Lewis wrote, but that doesn't make her any less qualified to go on these dangerous missions. Having a child on the mission is very much in keeping with Narnia.

Edmund received corporal punishment in LWW, and that movie was rated PG.

Yes, but that was from the WW, who is the evil bad character, not the hero or heroine of the story!

Did you know that many convicts were sent out to Australia never to see their families in England ever again?

Well...they were convicts.

In those times being a convict didn't mean you were a stupid, evil criminal. You could get sent to Australia for stealing to live. First offense. Not that I'm defending it, but there were a lot of very poor people in England who did what they had to do to survive. There were not food stamps or unemployment insurance! If you loved your family very much, and were their primary bread-winner, maybe you'd rather take them to Australia then leave them (forever!) to beg on the streets or go into a workhouse!

The audience needs to know this, rather than the reader who should have gleaned this beforehand.

Which is why Caspian is referred to as King Caspian several times before this scene takes place.

I think wagga meant that the audience wouldn't know Caspian was also King of the Lone Islands.

I really don't know what to say about the Lone Islands Incident. I can understand taking Eustace, but I can't understand not taking any crew members. The minotaur might have been handy...
First Caspian acts all serious about it, creeping around like a SWAT team member, aiming his crossbow at Edmund's back, for goodness sake, and then he's leaving the most insignificant team member behind to guard. I don't think the situation had gotten noticeably safer, had it?! Though I do think it's possible that Caspian was thinking of Eustace in terms of his kinship to capable Ed and Lu. This is before his pitiful duel with Reepicheep, remember. Caspian doesn't know the extent of his abilities, and assumes the best, I think. (not a smart move, though, in a dangerous situation.) Edmund, who knows Eustace's limitations, should have stepped in. He was just too happy to his cousin out of his hair.

If going off to kill the Dark Island, something that has been described as capable of destroying Narnia, isn't a dire emergency, what is? Supernovas? The eminent collapse of reality itself into the Cosmic Egg? Justin Beiber going on tour again? Gael would have been far safer on Ramandu's Island and would have been close enough to have the cliched teary reunion with her mother after the victory. She would have had Ramandu's Daughter to watch over her, the theoretical Ramandu, and a whole table full of goodies to munch on. Should the worst have happened and the Dark Island defeated the crew, she probably would have been safer there, at Aslan's Table, than anywhere else in Narnia. Taking her into a deadly confrontation when her presence is not necessary and will not benefit the group in any way whatsoever is foolhardy and irresponsible.

For one thing, Book!/Movie!Lucy was never taken into combat in LWW. In fact, the Pevensies were expressly told that the girls should not fight in the battle in Book!LWW. And even then Book!Lucy was older than Gael. Again in PC, Book! Lucy and Book!Susan are left out of combat. Movie!Lucy is deliberately left out of combat in PC. In VDT, Book!/Movie!Lucy has grown to adulthood in Narnia once before and gained all sorts of skills, combat amongst those. She's not a child anymore. As for Book!Caspian, he was 13 (almost twice Gael's age) in PC and was raised to be a king, which means he had most likely been in training for the role since he was old enough to walk. Not exactly an ordinary child either. Gael is an overgrown toddler who has no helpful skills to offer who should have been brought back to her aunt at the beginning.

All of the protestations that we're arguing Gael should have been abused or marooned are absurd straw men. If you can't counter a valid argument with anything other than "Omigosh!! You want them to leave Gael to die/beat her black and blue!" (something no one has even vaguely suggested), then perhaps your position isn't as valid as you might think.

As for Botany Bay, there is no comparison. Without a husband and father, the families left behind in England would most likely starve to death on the streets or suffer in poorly run workhouses. How is this even remotely akin to Gael's situation? Are we now assuming the aunt was an evil witch of a woman who would set Gael to work like Cinderella scrounging around the ashes? Or perhaps if they had left Gael with Ramandu's Daughter, she would have decided Gael would make a tasty snack and fire up the barbecue pit?

I still fail to see the problem with Gael going to Dark Island. If you're going to suggest that it's foolish to have a child on a dangerous mission then I'm afraid all of the Narnia books are foolish, as all of the main characters (besides Aslan) are children.
Narnia is built on the idea of kids going into another world where they are much capable of much more than anyone in our world would ever dream. Children fight wars in Narnia. Children find lost princes whom trained warriors couldn't locate. Children fight off evil witches. All this with the help of Aslan of course. But who would think children had any kind of help to offer Narnia? Apparently C.S. Lewis did. Let's not forget that (even though they didn't use them in the books) Father Christmas did give Lucy and Susan weapons. I don't think it was just so they could sit home and stay safe.
Knowing all the things that children did in Narnia I don't see how anyone could have an issue with bringing a child to Dark Island. Gael didn't prove to be any trouble on Dark Island. As it turned out if Caspian should've left anyone back on Ramandu's Island where it was safe, he should've left King Edmund, since he's the one who thought of the sea serpent. Age and gender has nothing to do with who was fit to go and who wasn't.

I believe that is all I have to say on the matter. King Edmund caused problems. Gael didn't. What was the harm in her going?

Your points, AslanIsOnTheMove, is one of the reasons why Gael was a bad choice to include in the movie at all. The Pevensies, Eustace, Jill, were all chosen specifically by Aslan to come from our world to Narnia. And look at the books. As Bookwyrm mentioned, only Peter and Edmund fought in the Battle of Beruna. And guess what - they're boys. Yes, it's politically incorrect, but even historically, young boys were considered able (and trained) to fight - knights started training at age 7! Girls, did not. If you notice, in the books, Lucy only fights once, in HHB, fighting with the archers away from the front lines. Neither Lucy nor Susan fight in PC.

Then we have Silver Chair. There, you might say, is proof that a girl as young as Gael was in a dangerous situation because Jill, according to the official timeline, wouldn't have been much older than Gael. Except Jill didn't fight in any battle - Eustace, Puddleglum, and then Rilian did. The only time Jill fought in a battle was during the Last Battle - Armaggedon - and she was 16 years old. You can hardly equate the two.

Gael, on the other hand, is a small girl. She has no training (like Edmund and Lucy and Caspian), no experience in battle, and she's hardly more than 6 or 7 years old. And she's a girl. There, I said it again. She's an girl, untrained and unprepared for the evil on Dark Island (unlike Lucy who, though a young girl, was once a grown woman who ruled a country). It is irresponsible for anyone considering themselves an adult to take a child to the source of great evil *on purpose*.

And, as I said before, Gael didn't even have to be left with a baby-sitter. Rhince could have stayed with her. Yes, they might have needed the men, but Rhince is an addition to the crew, not a hand-picked member of the Dawn Treader. Rhince had a responsibility as a father to keep his daughter safe, even if that means not going to Dark Island. And, unless I've forgotten, he didn't exactly *do* much on Dark Island that necessitates him being there.

And can I just say that blaming Edmund for the sea serpent is not remotely related to this argument? If Edmund hadn't thought 'sea serpent', someone else would probably have thought 'sea serpent' (considering how much Drinian oh so helpfully kept warning about them) or 'iceberg' or 'big, big dragon' or 'giant scissors' or something else terrible that would attack the ship. The Dark Island wanted them out of the picture, it would have found *some* way of doing it. If *I* had been on the ship, Nazis would have taken over (I have strange dreams) and you can't say Nazis are a better option than sea serpents.

Rhince had a responsibility as a father to keep his daughter safe, even if that means not going to Dark Island. And, unless I've forgotten, he didn't exactly *do* much on Dark Island that necessitates him being there.

Rhince as a character is a legitimate character from the book VDT, where he was the steward or something. The Film VDT expands his role somewhat, giving him a backstory in the Lone Islands, a missing wife and a mysterious little daughter. In the film Rhince joins VDT at the Lone Islands, in the hopes of recovering his missing wife, kidnapped along with a bunch of other Lone Islanders.

If Gael had stayed with her aunt as she was clearly told to do so, there would not be a stowaway discovered on the voyage when it was already too late to go back to Narrowhaven and to be presented with the orange Eustace was wanting to help himself to. There would be no-one to notice the blue star, and no-one to be the foil for Lucy's personal development from a jealous younger sister to the more mature, protective individual praying for rescue at Dark Island.

Rhince - and Gael - are what defeating the Dark Island is all about in the film when they jump into the water, impatient to reach Gael's mother, revealed in the rowboats when Dark Island is destroyed. Their family reunion completes one of the quests of the Dawn Treader, and all that remains is for Caspian to return to Narnia taking so many people with him, but leaving behind Lucy, Edmund, Eustace and Reepicheep who then can complete his own mission.

So it's excusable to take small children into deadly danger for no good reason, when there is an entirely safe alternative that won't require any extra effort to pursue. Good to know. Don't think I'd ever want someone who thinks that babysitting any children.

This is not the real world. This is Narnia. In Narnia, kids fight wars. Remember Movie!Lucy is actually older than Book!Lucy. One could argue that it was terrible to take her on such a dangerous mission. True, Lucy had already been a queen for many years. But Narnia is centered around children doing things we would consider unsafe......

In the Narnia books, children do dangerous things all the time and no one gives it a second thought. Why is there such a huge double standard when it comes to the movie? No, Gael is not a character C.S. Lewis wrote, but that doesn't make her any less qualified to go on these dangerous missions. Having a child on the mission is very much in keeping with Narnia.

Precisely. 'Safe' solutions are not always so 'safe' at all. I expect that some of our board members have also read Lord of the flies, or seen the movie adaptations. This story is about how a bunch of kids, castaways on an island, revert to pure savagery when left alone without adult supervision. Maybe they have also learned of the horrific real-life experiences of quite young children put into boarding schools and orphanages up to the 1970's, when the ramifications of the Civil Rights movement started to hit home.

In contrast to 'Lord of the Flies', being on board the Dawn Treader is a far more disciplined and worthwhile experience, even for a 7 year old, since she has her own father around, as well as Lucy to keep an eye out for her. Even though there might be some danger to face on the voyage, and even though the Dawn Treader never seemed to have the draconian punishments of shipboard life so typical of the great voyages of yore, such as those of Magellan, Da Gama, Cook, Dampier, Bligh, or Drake among others. Not to mention the Mayflower or Australia's First Fleet.

The reason for a child as young as Gael is supposed to be, is that an older child might be more restrained and circumspect about demonstrating that she needs her mother than is the case with a younger child. One hopes an older child is more amenable to reason, and would accept the necessity of staying with aunts. As did Lucy, Edmund and Eustace so begrudgingly. An older child might not rush so impulsively to greet a missing mother that she is prepared to jump into the water to reach her.

As Lirenel points out, if there hadn't been a sea serpent there could have been giant scissors or something else to contend with on Dark Island. The sea serpent was definitely in the book VDT, and it did cause destruction, even there. And girls as young as Gael is supposed to be, do get horrible nightmares regardless of parental measures, and do have to learn to face them, as part of growing up. For myself, having to travel on the high seas with a bunch of others in little better than a rowboat would definitely be nightmarish. Though we know from the news and from history that is no nightmare but a recurring reality.

When in the book, Pittencream was the only person left on Ramandu's Island, because he was the most fearful of the Dawn Treader's continuing journey, I don't think that leaving the movie character Gael there for her safe-keeping is such a good idea. It dishonours her somehow, to equate her with Pittencream.

The real travesty of taking Gael to the Dark Island, in my opinion, is Rhince's total lack of concern about the safety of his daughter. Here they are, sailing into a place of pure evil that could easily cost all their lives, and he doesn't seem to have a second thought about taking Gael along.

Lewis's protagonists were children, yes, but in the parent/child relationships he portrayed, the parents take steps to ensure their children's safety. It is a parent's responsibility to protect their child, and Lewis clearly supports them doing just that.

For example, the very reason we have LWW is because Mrs. Pevensie sent her children away for their safety! Yes, Britain's children were one of the main reasons they were fighting, and yes, the war would have caused the four children to grow up quite a lot, but that didn't lead Mrs. Pevensie to keep them with her. There is simply no honor or valor in willfully dragging a child into battle, whether the Battle of Britain or the Dark Island.

'Safe' solutions are not always so 'safe' at all. I expect that some of our board members have also read Lord of the flies, or seen the movie adaptations. This story is about how a bunch of kids, castaways on an island, revert to pure savagery when left alone without adult supervision. Maybe they have also learned of the horrific real-life experiences of quite young children put into boarding schools and orphanages up to the 1970's, when the ramifications of the Civil Rights movement started to hit home.

I'm sorry, but I'm not sure I understand the point of this. It is certainly true that there have been child-care situations that have turned out to be a horrific experience for the children involved. That is truly awful. However, in this case, I don't see how it applies. Gael would be staying only for a short time on Ramandu's Island with Lilliandil, who is, from all appearances, trustworthy. And as others have pointed out, Rhince could certainly stay behind with her.

When in the book, Pittencream was the only person left on Ramandu's Island, because he was the most fearful of the Dawn Treader's continuing journey, I don't think that leaving the movie character Gael there for her safe-keeping is such a good idea. It dishonours her somehow, to equate her with Pittencream.

Pittencream is a fully-grown man who has the chance to sail on to the World's End. Because of his cowardice and selfishness, he misses out. By his own choice. Gael is a small girl, and the crew knows the Dark Island is highly dangerous and potentially deadly. Leaving Gael on Ramandu's Island is not a punishment or dishonoring; it's an act of caring and protection. The situation is entirely different from Pittencream's.

For example, the very reason we have LWW is because Mrs. Pevensie sent her children away for their safety! Yes, Britain's children were one of the main reasons they were fighting, and yes, the war would have caused the four children to grow up quite a lot, but that didn't lead Mrs. Pevensie to keep them with her. There is simply no honor or valor in willfully dragging a child into battle, whether the Battle of Britain or the Dark Island.

Um, did you know how many children snuck back into London to get back with their parents, for one reason or another? Just like Gael stowed away? Did you know that not all the places these children were evacuated to were havens of safety like Professor Kirk's house? Did you know that some of the people offering accommodation tended to use evacuated children as cheap labourers, much like Arsheesh in HHB? And did you know that at least one shipment of evacuated children bound for Canada was sunk en route with many children's lives lost?

There were the best intentions in sending children away during World War 2, I agree, but they weren't always realised. Any more than such government initiatives are realised in other places and in other circumstances, such as the children shipped out to Australia or Canada in the Fairbridge scheme, or the Aboriginal children taken from their parents, like those in Rabbit Proof Fence, a must-see film if you ever venture Down Under. UK, I agree, was lucky to have time to prepare for the possibility of German attack. Most other countries who were invaded by the Germans had no such plans in place. They had no choice at all in exposing their children to the nightmare of World War II.

C.S.Lewis also accommodated such children, himself, and it is his observations of children without their parents along that are the basis for all these Narnia stories. What he is illustrating in the Narnia stories that it is only with Aslan's help in these situations that the children involved can emerge successfully, and safe and sound.

I'm sorry, but I'm not sure I understand the point of this. It is certainly true that there have been child-care situations that have turned out to be a horrific experience for the children involved. That is truly awful. However, in this case, I don't see how it applies. Gael would be staying only for a short time on Ramandu's Island with Lilliandil, who is, from all appearances, trustworthy. And as others have pointed out, Rhince could certainly stay behind with her.

It does apply, because Rhince would hate to stay on Ramandu's island with Gael, as you suggest if he wanted to recover his wife so much. He wouldn't have left rescuing his wife to his shipmates whilst he stayed behind to 'mind' his daughter. What was his biggest nightmare? That his wife would not want him any more.

And it does apply to Gael who wanted her mother, no matter what. And 'short times' could stretch into long times as Eustace, Lucy and Edmund could tell you. As they were informed in Susan's postcard. When the crew went to Dark Island there was no more assurance they would be able to return for her than Edmund and Lucy had of their family's safe return from America. Then where would Gael be? Marooned forever on Ramandu's Island with Lilliandil, unless Lilliandil could find a way to get Gael back to her aunt.

From the film's Point of View, it would be throwing out the baby with the bathwater to have Gael, or worse, Rhince, stay behind on Ramandu's Island, just to avoid the sorts of danger Gael had already faced by stowing away. And from the book's point of view, which mentioned Rhince, as well as Pittencream, in connection with staying on Ramandu's Island it would certainly not be Rhince's choice. He was the one running around to collect the names of people willing to go on with the voyage after the mutiny, wasn't he?

I would agree that Experiment House bullies in SC, and the trials and tribulations of Edmund and Lucy staying with Eustace at the beginning of VDT are not comfortable experiences. Uncle Harold in the film seems to be too unresponsively absorbed in the news to be much of a guardian. But these experiences are merely commonplace annoyances in comparison with the savagery of what really went on in World War II and long afterwards in real life as I've been saying.

In any case, separating families is the last sort of decision you would expect from Caspian, whether book Caspian or film Caspian, however you consider it, and even if it really was his decision to make. As he also shows in the film. It was not a stupid decision for Caspian to make.

If Gael had stayed with her aunt as she was clearly told to do so, there would not be a stowaway discovered on the voyage when it was already too late to go back to Narrowhaven and to be presented with the orange Eustace was wanting to help himself to. There would be no-one to notice the blue star, and no-one to be the foil for Lucy's personal development from a jealous younger sister to the more mature, protective individual praying for rescue at Dark Island.

The stowaway isn't necessary. Gael being given an orange is an essential plot point? And I rather doubt an entire ship full of sailors would be incapable of spotting the blue star. As for Lucy being mature and praying for help, she did that just fine on her own in the book. If she constantly needs a cute little pint-sized tagalong to affirm her self-esteem, heaven help her in the real world.

Rhince - and Gael - are what defeating the Dark Island is all about in the film when they jump into the water, impatient to reach Gael's mother, revealed in the rowboats when Dark Island is destroyed. Their family reunion completes one of the quests of the Dawn Treader

This could easily have happened on RI and it would have had the benefit of not making Rhince and Gael look like idiots.

Precisely. 'Safe' solutions are not always so 'safe' at all. I expect that some of our board members have also read Lord of the flies, or seen the movie adaptations. This story is about how a bunch of kids, castaways on an island, revert to pure savagery when left alone without adult supervision. Maybe they have also learned of the horrific real-life experiences of quite young children put into boarding schools and orphanages up to the 1970's, when the ramifications of the Civil Rights movement started to hit home.

What does any of this have to do with Gael? As I wrote in my previous post, are you seriously implying that Ramandu's Daughter and Gael's aunt are dangerous lunatics just waiting to make Gael miserable? Because I fail to see how EVUL boarding schools and Lord of the Flies have anything to do with what we're discussing. I'm truly sorry if you had a crappy childhood filled with horrific boarding school conditions akin to C. S. Lewis' experiences, but I think you're overly identifying with the character if this is the sort of scenarios you're reading into this discussion. There is a world of difference between rather selfishly packing a child off for months at a time to a distant school where there is no accountability and precious little responsible adult supervision and saying "Hi, nice Star Lady, watch the little moppet for us for a few hours while we go on a potential suicide mission to destroy the Dark Island that we've been told constantly is capable of destroying the whole world."

Did you know that some of the people offering accommodation tended to use evacuated children as cheap labourers, much like Arsheesh in HHB? And did you know that at least one shipment of evacuated children bound for Canada was sunk en route with many children's lives lost?

Oy vey. So now Ramandu's Daughter is a potential psychotic and just secretly wanting a kid to come along to do her dishes for her? Lord knows she must go through a lot with that huge table full of goodies.

When the crew went to Dark Island there was no more assurance they would be able to return for her than Edmund and Lucy had of their family's safe return from America. Then where would Gael be? Marooned forever on Ramandu's Island with Lilliandil, unless Lilliandil could find a way to get Gael back to her aunt.

How on Earth could this occur? The Dark Island is close enough to Ramandu's Island that Eustace swam between the two apparently. They were certainly close enough to be in viewing distance. Unless you're implying the crew was so incompetent that they could get lost within the space of a few miles, the only other way that Gael could end up trapped on RI is if the Dark Island won and slaughtered the crew. And in that case, I would rather think she would be better off alive in one of the few places in Narnia so directly connected with Aslan that the odds are pretty good of him showing up to save her from apparently being tempted to death.

From the film's Point of View, it would be throwing out the baby with the bathwater to have Gael, or worse, Rhince, stay behind on Ramandu's Island, just to avoid the sorts of danger Gael had already faced by stowing away.

This would be true if Gael was secretly a ninja princess or had some other mad cool fighting skillz. Then leaving a valuable asset behind out of a misguided notion of protecting something that doesn't need protecting would be rather foolish. Except Gael is not a valuable asset and she does require protecting. She is a child without any beneficial skills or combat ability. She is, in fact, a liability since the rest of the crew as well as her father will feel they must protect her.

In any case, separating families is the last sort of decision you would expect from Caspian, whether book Caspian or film Caspian, however you consider it, and even if it really was his decision to make.

Um, do the families of his sailors not count? If Caspian had this sort of laissez-faire "Oh, this is a fun holiday adventure!" attitude, why didn't he bring along all the wives and children of his sailors? Why not build a gigantic cruise liner and have a long pleasure excursion?

I'm sure that every military person around the world will be delighted to know that recklessly taking small children into combat is just fine and dandy, just as long as the child has a good excuse. Heaven forbid the adults be adults and put their foot down. A child's desires and demands must always be succumbed to, even if it puts them and others in danger.

There is a world of difference between rather selfishly packing a child off for months at a time to a distant school where there is no accountability and precious little responsible adult supervision and saying "Hi, nice Star Lady, watch the little moppet for us for a few hours while we go on a potential suicide mission to destroy the Dark Island that we've been told constantly is capable of destroying the whole world."

Are you saying there is a guaranteed return from a 'potential suicide mission'? I rest my case. Without criticizing either Gael's aunt or Lilliandil. Didn't I say short term has a tendency to turn into long term?

There is a world of difference between rather selfishly packing a child off for months at a time to a distant school where there is no accountability and precious little responsible adult supervision and saying "Hi, nice Star Lady, watch the little moppet for us for a few hours while we go on a potential suicide mission to destroy the Dark Island that we've been told constantly is capable of destroying the whole world."

Are you saying there is a guaranteed return from a 'potential suicide mission'? I rest my case. Without criticizing either Gael's aunt or Lilliandil. Didn't I say short term has a tendency to turn into long term?

You're completely missing the point on everything that everyone is saying, and undercutting your own point with statements like the above. I'm starting to think you're doing this on purpose...

But besides that, let us look at the options for Gael:

1. Go with the Dawn Treader to Dark Island as in the movie. Without knowing the outcome of the situation, we know that the crew will be facing an evil greater than a witch. Dreams will come true - good or otherwise. Gael is 7 years old, has no martial skills and this situation could very easily end with her watching her father die before her eyes before being killed herself.

2. Stay on Ramandu's Island with Lilliandil. Lilliandil has proven herself a faithful guide, and she is the guardian of Aslan's Table. Aslan's Table is presumably a place which has been set up by Aslan himself. Aslan, in Narnia, is known to interfere specifically to save people in trouble (e.g. sending warriors to rescue Edmund from the WW, raising up the river god to drown the Telmarines). We can assume from this that Aslan will provide for Gael on Ramandu's Island as well, if the Dawn Treader never returns. Perhaps sending another ship. Perhaps having Lilliandil float her home through the sky. Regardless, if the Dawn Treader never returns there is a grown woman set to take care of Gael if necessary - might be lonely, but feasible. Regardless, pretty much the only way Gael will have to stay on Ramandu's Island longer than a few hours is if the Green Mist defeats the Dawn Treader, in which case the Green Mist will probably kill/destroy/kidnap/etc Gael on Ramandu's Island. Otherwise Daddy will be bringing Mommy home to her and there's a happy reunion.

3. Rhince stays on Ramandu's Island with Gael. It's not what he would want, but maybe he should have made sure the aunt brought Gael to the shore to see the Dawn Treader off when they left Narrowhaven (so he could see that she is safe and in good hands) instead of assuming a desperate little girl is staying put. But regardless, he could have stayed with his daughter on Ramandu's Island with plenty of supplies and pray for the best for the ship. He is an extraneous sailor - useful to have but not necessary for a successful trip.

Arguments stemming from the theme of the movie - Lucy needing a little friend, the movie needing a 'heart', needing someone to relate to, etc - are superfluous questions unrelated to what we are discussing: that Caspian made a stupid decision, within the bounds of the story, to bring Gael to the Dark Island.

Are you saying there is a guaranteed return from a 'potential suicide mission'? I rest my case. Without criticizing either Gael's aunt or Lilliandil. Didn't I say short term has a tendency to turn into long term?

Let me get this straight. Should the mission go horribly wrong, you would prefer that Gael die a no doubt horrible death watching her father and friends also die horribly than she be left safely on an island with a friendly and powerful woman who could care for her and raise her. That's just ... wow. I would think a parent would prefer the option that resulted in their child safe and alive rather than murdered by eldritch abominations, but I guess I was wrong. I think we're done here.

Lilliandil should have taken care of and watched over Gael while the crew battled the Dark Island. It's not like she has anything better to do.