My favorite part of the 'swallowed' scene is the bit where the narrator says "and he sounded neither glad nor sorry". It works not because Aslan is unemotional but because the action is one traditionally associated with lions.

I think it's deft characterization: someone else might have made Aslan a man in a lion skin, but Aslan does...lion-y things.

My favorite part of the 'swallowed' scene is the bit where the narrator says "and he sounded neither glad nor sorry". It works not because Aslan is unemotional but because the action is one traditionally associated with lions.

I think it's deft characterization: someone else might have made Aslan a man in a lion skin, but Aslan does...lion-y things.

That's true! I remember glumPuddle saying on the podcast that he took it not as a metaphor, but rather that Aslan had physically swallowed these things. Still, it would be interesting to see Aslan swallow an entire realm.

I also got the impression from "neither glad nor sorry" that it was something that had to be done, from the standpoint of justice. It's very intriguing to ponder.

Yeah, we had a HUGE discussion last year (I think it was) in a topic called "Did Aslan eat?" about whether or not the "consumption" of realms, children, adults, etc.... was metaphorical or not.

You can probably find it by searching some of the older topics in TAN

(If it's locked, and you want it reopened, shoot me a PM and I can take care of that )

I always thought it to be metaphorical, but perhaps not, then. It is an interesting thing to think about it, though.

I also got the impression from "neither glad nor sorry" that it was something that had to be done, from the standpoint of justice. It's very intriguing to ponder.

That's the feeling I was getting as well.

Yeah, we had a HUGE discussion last year (I think it was) in a topic called "Did Aslan eat?" about whether or not the "consumption" of realms, children, adults, etc.... was metaphorical or not.

You can probably find it by searching some of the older topics in TAN.

Thanks, I found it! It's strange to think of Aslan eating people for sustenance. It's always seemed like more of a justice-related thing to me. Still, the question of Aslan eating at all is very interesting. We don't know what he did on his "time off" so to speak. I'm rather tempted to think that he went back to his own country for dinner, but who knows?

I actually wrote a 20 page essay for school on this exact subject a year ago and would be happy to share the main points sometime if anyone was still interested. (Not the eating, but the "not a tame lion" repeated theme). Only came across the forum post because I'm looking for discussion topics on a new paper I'm writing.

^I would be interested in hearing your thoughts on this, LadyBessofWistry! It continues to be an interesting topic, especially with The Silver Chair moving into pre-production soon and a new interpretation of the character on the horizon.

(This is really belated considering you joined in 2010, but since this is your first post on the forum... welcome to NarniaWeb!)

I also think of Aslan swallowing up "girls and boys, women and men, kings and emperors, cities and realms" as being about justice. We never see Aslan eating for sustenance (correct me if I'm wrong), but if he did I don't think he would eat a rational being just because he was hungry. Doing so would certainly make him unsafe, but I think it would show that he isn't good. Mr. Beaver makes it pretty clear that Aslan is unsafe and good. In some ways I think it's his goodness that makes him scary. A good and powerful lion is a terrifying thing when you have a guilty conscience.

As for Aslan eating those things literally... I've always thought of the "girls and boys, women and men, kings and emperors" part as being literal. He has a mouth, and teeth, and presumably a stomach, so I don't see why not. The "cities and realms" part though... probably not literal. But what do I know?

I've always thought of the "girls and boys, women and men, kings and emperors" part as being literal. He has a mouth, and teeth, and presumably a stomach, so I don't see why not. The "cities and realms" part though... probably not literal. But what do I know?

When pondering this in the past, I feel like I probably haven't been considering the creation of Narnia enough. Aslan sang Narnia into existence, and if you play that scene in reverse, it is kind of like he's swallowing up a realm. So perhaps Lewis was thinking along those lines with that last part... it does make a bit more sense to me than the thought of Aslanzilla chowing down on a city.

One other thought that comes to mind is the way that Aslan's gigantic shadow swallows up all those who reject him when night falls on Narnia in The Last Battle... that is more of a metaphorical interpretation, but I think it seems like a more terrible fate than the literal one.

Basically my essay boiled down the answer to 3 main points: First, a terrifying, unpredictable God was a more medieval view of deity than most modern people accept and Lewis as a medieval scholar could have been bringing in that element with many of the other medieval culture that he introduced to the world of Narnia.

Second, a belief in a God that is beyond human control and understanding creates more of a feeling of awe or what Lewis termed the "numinous," which in turn brought us closer to truly understanding the God of the universe that Lewis believed bigger and more beyond our understanding than anything.

Finally, several of the most violent and frightening of the episodes with Aslan in the Chronicles have parallels in the vengeance wreaked by the God of the Old Testament. If you want more precise examples, I traced these in my paper.

Two of the quotes I came across in my research also seemed particularly interesting. One was that according to one medieval theologian/philosopher, the only way to truly describe God was to say what he was not, because no words we have could ever truly encompass all of any attribute of God...i.e. he is not tame, not he is wild. Secondly, in one of Lewis' letters he writes:

‘Gentle Jesus’, my elbow! The most striking thing about Our Lord is the union of great ferocity with extreme tenderness. (Remember Pascal? ‘I do not admire the extreme of one virtue unless you show me at the same time the extreme of the opposite virtue. One shows one’s greatness not by being at an extremity but by being simultaneously at two extremities and filling all the space between.’) [emphasis in the original] (Yours, Jack 315-316).

This has become one of my favorites of his quotes, though sometimes it's hard to wrap my head around the idea at being at both extremities and filling the whole spectrum in between. But one can try--perhaps that was what was meant by rationalists who encouraged control of ones passions in the 18th century.

My first post so hope all goes well! I hope I haven't repeated anything.

I would take "not tame" simply to mean that no one cant control Aslan, he is not a tool to be used but rather the Narnian saviour who will use others in his plan such as the Pevensies. Perhaps some of what Aslan says is uncomfortable, but it will be the truth.

What I did find not so uncomfortable but challenging when he states, "Work against the Emperors Magic?" after frowning upon the suggestion it occurs to no one to mention it again. I know had I suggested that I might fell slightly ashamed afterwards. That quote has always stuck out to me but that's just my opinion.

I agree with you Ione Islander. I took it to mean that Aslan cannot be controlled by anyone else. I also assumed it meant that he doesn't always operate according to human logic. For example, he didn't come in and save the Narnians in Prince Caspian the exact same way as he does in LWW, even though we might expect him to, and that's what WE would have done if we were him.

 Aslan is not tame in the fact that he is a push-over. He is not easily subsided and when you do something wrong, he is there to teach you that actions have consequences. While Aslan can be gentle and kind, he is there to teach you the right from wrong and give you punishments so you learn your lesson.  To explain it simply: Aslan is not always going to be gentle with you, because when you need to learn a lesson, he will make sure he teaches it to you, strict or not. 

That message got misinterpreted in The Last Battle when they say he's not 'a tame lion'.  Everyone assumes that because he is not tame, he is prone to do anything wild, whether good or bad. Yet even though Aslan is not a tame lion, he is a good lion and that makes all the difference. 

I always took that quote metaphorically, that Aslan "ate" by instilling Christianity in beings, cities, and countries, so they became part of him.