Well... It's not the plot--there are numerous books that have less engaging plot twists and yet still sell millions, and while the age of the books might have something to do with it, I doubt it affects it much--the Nancy Drew and Hardy Boys series are just as old, yet still have plenty of fans. And Narnia does too, for that matter. As for the people that don't like it... yes, age is a factor, but I'd say the biggest issue is the character's ages.

Think of today's most popular book series for teens/preteens, and to some extent, younger kids--Harry Potter, Twilight, and The Hunger Games. Think of popular TV shows--iCarly, Good Luck Charlie, My Little Pony: FiM. All of these stories feature main characters that are at least 15 (...eventually, in a couple cases). Most people prefer stories about teenagers now. Teens and young adults like them, because it's their age group and any younger would be 'uncool', and preteens, because teens are... well, 'cool', in their eyes.

The Chronicles, however, has protagonists that are 8-12. Such age groups aren't unheard of in current literature, but they're a lot rarer.

Also, as much as I hate to say it, the Chronicles lose fans because none of them have strong romances. Romance, even as a subplot, will pull in more rabid fans than any other genre. Because Narnia doesn't have that pull factor, some kids (mainly girls) might find them boring.

Obviously, in the end, it all boils down to opinion.

That is a very good point about age groups and character preferences, Badger.

Most kids I have seen and know don't really start reading chapter books as long as Narnia until maybe fourth, fifth, and sixth grade on their own. I certainly didn't do so until that age group myself. These ages are the same as the children in the books.

Strangely enough though, it seems kids really want to be older than they are now (not to sound off topic). They think that reading stuff like Twilight will make them cool, as I have seen fifth graders read the series. It doesn't really help that the films- again, not for this section- get criticized for being a kids' version of Lord of the Rings.

Who cares though really? Just enjoy what you want.

This is an excellent example of my definition of The Chronicles of Narnia: children's books written for adults. C.S. Lewis wrote well-written and interesting stories that children enjoy. However, many teenagers and adults still enjoy them because of the deep meanings of the books.
[...]
I believe the books are written more for adults than children. (Although this may be because children were much more advanced intellectually during the 40s and education is not as stressed nowadays).

Lewis and Tolkien said that as nobody would write the kind of books they wanted to read, they had to write them themselves. So they may well be written more for adults than for children (although Lewis intended them as children's books).

So yes, people may turn against them because they think they are too childish. I'm sure many would change their minds if they tried the books, though.

I'm reminded of Terry Pratchett's words about Fantasy books:

(...) many of the best fantasy books had traditionally been published and sold for children, presumably on the basis that children are interested in nursery stuff like courage, heroism, adventure and the possibility of changing the world for the better (whereas adults are grown-up - and perhaps prefer reading about adultery).

I think a lot of people hate Narnia because it seems babyish to them. And whether Narnia was written for kids or not, and whether that makes any difference or not, it does make a difference to most highschool/college students who, on the whole, value their reputation among judgmental friends above anything else. In fact, there's a good chance they themselves are judgmental, when it comes to deciding whether or not something is a good story. And I don't mean the sensible kind of judging, either.

Plus, Narnia is more cheerful than a lot of other stories, on the whole. Yes, I know it has its dark moments. Yes, I recall Underland, the death of Aslan, and... basically all of LB. But it's still going to look very cheery and childish to those people who, when they hear the words "dark story", think of demon-style horror movies and slasher films. The sad truth of the matter is that the majority of young people find it cool and entertaining to watch gory killings, raunchy comedies, and anything else they know would be considered scandalous. Of course they're not going to be interested in Narnia, or anything else which has its value in morals and simplistic beauty.

~Riella

I only met one person who didn't like Narnia, and he said it was because it made him believe in Narnia and that it was a huge disappointment when we found out it didn't exist.

Lol De_De.

In regards to why people dislike Narnia, I remember a quote from Tolkien's foreword to The Fellowship of the Ring:

Some who have read the book, or at any rate have reviewed it, have found it boring, absurd, or contemptible; and I have no cause to complain, since I have similar opinions of their works, or of the kinds of writing that they evidently prefer.

Interestingly, Tolkien himself didn't like the books because they mixed mythologies.

One reason I know of that some modern Christians dislike Narnia is because they believe children, or adults for that matter, should not read about any sort of magic, so most fantasy is out.

In regards to why people dislike Narnia, I remember a quote from Tolkien's foreword to The Fellowship of the Ring:

Some who have read the book, or at any rate have reviewed it, have found it boring, absurd, or contemptible; and I have no cause to complain, since I have similar opinions of their works, or of the kinds of writing that they evidently prefer.

Interestingly, Tolkien himself didn't like the books because they mixed mythologies.

Lewis would not fall into the group that Tolkien mentions here, as he thought very highly of Tolkien's books, and encouraged him to go on when he was stuck in the manuscript.

Tolkien was not satisfied with the Narnia books, though, you're right about that. In connection with the mixed mythologies he said about the books in Mr Tumnus' bookshelf, "It won't do, you know". I think he also disapproved of the lack of depth in the world-building that went into Narnia. He worked very differently with his own world-building, going into way more details, making languages and detailed history summaries.

So some people might dislike the Chronicles of Narnia because Tolkien's books are so very different.

Lewis would not fall into the group that Tolkien mentions here, as he thought very highly of Tolkien's books, and encouraged him to go on when he was stuck in the manuscript.

I know, my point was that people who dislike Narnia may simply prefer books that we ourselves dislike.

If Narnia had had any more romance in it then it does now, I wouldn't have enjoyed it as a kid. I disagree with the statement that "girls are only interested in gossip and people getting engaged."
Of course, I did know a couple of girls who did seem to be interested in people getting engaged, but it was definitely not the main interest of the girls I was around.

I don't pay attention to those who hate it, as long as the fans (like us) like it, then that's all that should matter.

Let me explain the problem as I see it.
Whilst Tolkien created a world with firm rules and mythology, Lewis' Narnia is mainly a collection of beasts from folklore. It seems derivative of other fiction rather than being wholly original.

The simplistic, black and white morality is also rather galling after a while.
Certain fans don't help this when they simply claim characters are 'evil'.

One specific example springs to mind from this very forum. In the run up to Prince Caspian, members here actually criticised the film makers for having Minotaurs as part of Caspians army.
Their reasoning?
"Minotaurs are evil." Why? They just are. They are all evil, apparently, the entire species.
Such childish moral absolutism is insulting, infuriating even.

And to top this off, Aslan is unlikable. Rude, unpleasant, demanding. Saying 'he's not a tame lion' is enough to gloss over him begrudging Lucy the chance to tend to her wounded brother or slashing up someones back. He is an unpleasant character.

Not to be insulting or rude Ronny, but why are you part of Narniaweb? You don't seem to be a fan of the books.

And as far as Aslan's character

He didn't begrudge Lucy tending to Edmund. she had already tended to him, she just wanted to stay around to make sure it worked while others were dying. If asking someone to save others from death makes you unlikeable, then I don't want to be liked.

And Aravis deserved to have her back clawed, she purposely drugged her servant knowing she would be beaten for it. Crimes deserve punishment, even if it is at times unpleasent.

But that is besides the point. Aslan isn't asking for you to like him. He's simply doing what's right and what needs to be done.

Who was Aslan to administer the punishment? Who was he to do that? This wandering Lion, this irresponsible beast who plays with the lives of others as though they were no more than toys. His idea of justice is warped and we're just supposed to think he's good, no matter how many times he wanders off and allows injustice to run wild despite having the power to stop it.
I hate him, I truly despise him. Filthy little insurrectionist who sees fit to unseat the rightful monarch of Narnia in favour of a bunch of children.
But that's fine, that's okay, because the kids are the right race.
And he does it again with the Telmarines, stirring revolt against them, playing with the lives of others, turning up when it suits him instead of when he's actually needed.

And as for his little interaction with Lucy, all it did was diminish his big, noble sacrifice:
Must MORE people die for Edmund?
Emotional blackmail, guilt tripping. She was a little girl and her brother was hurt. How dare he treat her like that? Foul, ill-mannered beast to deny a child the company of her brother in such a desperate time. And to use the traumatic image of his death to stir her into action.
He's horrible, he is truly detestable.

But really, what can one expect from a rebel? A malcontent who usurps the throne from an experienced, efficient Queen based on hokey prophecies and 'birth right'?
I respect and admire Jadis far, far more than I ever did Aslan. She protected Narnia from the foreign hordes who would have invaded were it not for her magic.
Aslan? Oh, he strolls in, causes chaos and then saunters off when it is convenient.

You ask why I'm even here. Well, let me put it this way.
Aslan is not Narnia. The books, despite not being wholly original in the world Lewis created, are nonetheless incredibly well written, entertaining works of fiction. And towards the end, we get some truly great characters such as Shift and Tash.
I just despise the moral absolutism and the idea that Aslan is 'good' because we're told he's good. And we're just supposed to close our eyes and ignore his rudeness, his self righteousness and his irresponsibility.

God bless Jadis, that's all I can say, God save the Queen!

How many of the books have you read Ronny?

All of them.