Meryl Streep as Aslan? Greta Gerwig’s Narnia, C.S. Lewis, and the Christian Controversy
Cameron (00:01)
Hello. Hey, welcome to Thinking Out Loud. I'm your co host, Cameron McAllister.
Nathan (00:05)
And I'm your co host, Nathan Rittenhouse.
Cameron (00:07)
The nations are in an uproar. CS Lewis Fandom is in an uproar. There is an adaptation of the chronic Roar Roar Thank you. Thank you.
Nathan (00:15)
Roar, I I know where you're going with this. And roar, I mm mm mm. What
what what is the gender of that roar? That is the question.
Cameron (00:23)
Mm-hmm. Absolutely, Nathan. Very apropos of today's subject matter. So if you didn't know, Greta Gerwig, the d the actress and director behind movies like Barbie, Lady Bird, is Frances Ha, also wife of Noah Blombach, also talented director. She is going to be doing an adaptation of The Chronicles of Narnia. I believe this is with Netflix. So it's a big deal. But the announcement was just made that the voice
Of Aslan is going to be Morgan Freeman. And no.
Nathan (00:57)
No.
Cameron (00:59)
No, gotcha. Not Morgan Freeman. It is going to be Merrill Streep. Let me pause there for a second for dramatic effect. All right. So we don't know here, let me tell you what we do not know. And that is not much beyond that fact.
The announcement was simply made that Meryl Streep will voice Aslan. So we do not know whether Aslan is going to be portrayed as female. We don't know that. We know that a female actor is is voicing. That's really it. The internet being the internet and our culture just being what it is, a lot of responses have have come along. A lot of very strong takes. The strongest take
From Christian circles, Nathan, throw in anything here that I'm missing. But essentially it goes a little bit like this. Here we have another example of the progressive agenda invading imaginative territory. And this is nothing neutral because in this case, it's not like we're just taking creative liberties with Homer's Odyssey. This is a story in which Oslan is very widely understood to be representing Christ. He is the Christ figure.
So to try to mess with that in any way is basically yeah, it's tantamount to heresy, it's blasphemous, but it is also indicative of our tendency to think that we can rewrite any any script, in q including the human biological script, that we can through technology re engineer ourselves, remake ourselves, and people will point to other example well, they will point this movie is gonna be the n magician's nephew.
So they'll they'll point to Uncle Uncle Andrew, right? Uncle Andrew, who is the is that his name?
No, I'll get the name right in a second. But the it's been a I Well, no, there's d no Diggory is the is the
Nathan (02:55)
no, white Yeah. Dilroy or something. What's the Diggery
Cameron (03:04)
is the boy, but it's his it's his uncle who is dabbling in sorcery. And they basically point out that in Lewis, there's a little motif in Lewis's work that involves sorcery as shorthand.
Nathan (03:17)
no, it is
Uncle Andrew. You got it. Ketterly.
Cameron (03:18)
Yeah, Uncle Andrew, right. So so
Yeah. So sorcery is shorthand for for a a a desire, an ambition to control, to rewrite nature, to control nature, and to ultimately control human nature. This is also explor explored in his novel, That Hideous Strength. And the essay that really touches on that theme is the abolition of man. All right. Here's my let me just
I'm gonna call foul though now, having said that, and you g you want to add anything? Did I miss anything, Nathan? Okay.
Nathan (03:49)
Nope, I think it's great.
Cameron (03:52)
I'm gonna call foul there and say, that's interesting. That's all well and good. It's right now, much ado about nothing, because all we know is that Meryl Streep is gonna be the voice of Aslan, and we don't know anything else beyond that. So this take that starts with this casting decision.
And l some of these, I'm not this is not an exaggeration, go all the way to and this is why Western civilization is is in a state of decay. I say, okay. I'm not so sure how much this has to do with the Chronicles of Narnia, Greta Gerwig, and any of this right now. Is this this feels more like we're just using this as a springboard to get on a so or or just an opportunity to get on our soapbox and just create more.
content and flood the web with yet another take. All right. I sound very cynical. And kick it over to you now, Nathan.
Nathan (04:50)
So so
Lil, I I think we need to get you to flesh out your your nothing burger nature here a little bit in the
Cameron (04:55)
yeah, I should. Sure.
Nathan (04:57)
sense that say more about artistic license and that that side of things.
Cameron (05:00)
Okay. Yeah. All
right. So here's so trigger warning, I'm going to give you a perspective here that I think will make some of you mad. And this is honest all all I can say is this is honestly what I think. I can also say I am open to correction. So sure, sure. So yeah, I mean here this with a with with a note of humility. Yeah, Nathan
Nathan (05:15)
Yeah, I'll provide that part later. No.
Cameron (05:20)
was cracking his knuckles before the episode, which leads me to believe I'm I'm in for a clobbering. And he and you know, Nathan is generally a fairly peaceable guy, so ooh. So
Part of this also involves a philosophical question about artistic license and artistic liberties. So Greta Gerwig has the full support and cooperation of the Lewis Estate. The Lewis Estate is an empire. The estimated sales for the Chronicles of Narnia, I think well, Lion and the Witch in the Wardrobe, I'm not sure whether this includes all the books, but Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe, I think it's somewhere in it's over a hundred million copies. I think somewhere in the neighborhood of 126 million.
Nathan (05:56)
And and do you know
how many printings and editions and new
versions
Cameron (05:59)
My goodness.
Nathan (06:00)
I mean like annually? So you're saying they're kind of strapped for money?
Cameron (06:02)
Yes. So I mean y
you are looking at an absolute industry here. So they have now and now they have a major, major Hollywood player and major just industry players with lots of lots of juice and lots of influence knocking at their door and they've given full permission to them. Okay. So you asked me earlier on the phone, well, what if she, you know, re
what if she reconceived of Aslan as what what was it you said? Some other an a dog? And I said
Nathan (06:32)
A dog. Yeah, instead of a cat. Instead of the feline, let's go canine.
Cameron (06:35)
And I said, what well, she could reconceive of Aslan as a mouse. And part of what I'm saying there is, so this is first of all, this is not sacred scripture. So this is a story and C.S. Lewis was an eng a literature professor who wrote fiction and this is a work of fiction. And if somebody else
Has been handed the keys to the castle and they want to take some artistic liberties, they can do that. You don't have to watch it. Or, and you know, well, what this could be really harmful for for the imagination of children, all that. That's true. So your kids don't have to watch it. Or you could watch it with them and discerningly walk through it and ask and you know, look at some of the interesting questions it raises, depending on the age and maturity level of your child, of course. But
Again, my point back to my point. She has artistic license and liberty, and she may do things that are that lack taste, that are perhaps even in a sense immoral, but she can but she's able to do that. And that in and of itself isn't some grand violation. C. S. Lewis is not writing sacred scripture. And so to say, Well, this is you know, you could take some you could mess around with Homer, but you can't mess around with Aslan,
I don't buy that. It's not again, it's not a sacred text.
Nathan (08:00)
Yeah. Well and and I think I mean probably the people who are really enjoying this, there are a handful of Christians out there who don't even let their kids read the Chronicles of Narnia in general because it's magic and talking animals and fantasy and
Cameron (08:14)
It's got some pretty strong pagan elements in it. As you go on, you get you get kind of pagan gods
Nathan (08:18)
Yeah. So
Cameron (08:20)
and festivals and all of that. That stuff catches people off guard if they move past Lion the Witch in the Wardrobe.
Nathan (08:25)
Yeah, so you're so you're you're at some point, I guess, I'm I'm affirming what you're saying there, you you have to develop the the degree to which a story is still productive for communicating the deeper ideas that you think are coming through through it if you're seeing it strictly as a a vehicle for a yeah, a vehicle for a message rather than just a story for the for the sake of the fun of the story. I do think that there's here's the question that I have.
And
and this is this does not apply just to this and and I and I do have some bigger perhaps well, maybe we'll get there. So I I by default, when there is let's say that you have a hymn and you sang it the same way for 200 years, and then somebody comes up with a new way to sing the hymn.
For some people, that's going to be really exciting and help them engage with the idea in a fresh set of ways. And for a whole other group of people, they're going to look at that and like, okay, we changed it, but why did it need to be changed? What what's the what's the motivation or the reason for the change? What's going what like what new thing is coming out of and and actually I this is a fairly decent parallel, because hymns aren't scripture either.
But you do have, I think in the last twenty, thirty years, certainly it's it's interesting to be in worship services where you have people singing in which like pronouns for God have been changed in hymns. and
Cameron (10:02)
Yeah, sure. Yep.
Nathan (10:03)
so you kind of get these like not everybody's on the same page there 'cause we're singing, or like we've taken out the word man or mankind and stuck another word in there, or and on some of those you can see like, okay, th we want to be inclusive to recognize women are sinners also.
in our hymns. So, you know, like those make sense. do we need to shift the pronouns of God in our worship? Or is that part of a broader deconstructing of a sense in which we see scripture not as a revelation but as a construction of the patriarchy? Then it does feel like it has a a philosophical and political and perhaps yeah theological orientation to it. So though I don't want
To act like those conversations aren't important while at the same time agreeing with Cameron that this is different because this is not a Well, here's the question, Cameron. I are the
Cameron (10:55)
Mm-hmm. Let's hear.
Nathan (10:56)
Chronicles of Narnia essentially a theological work?
Cameron (11:01)
Yeah, well yes, in some ways, but there are plenty of books that are th I mean, I think so I love John Updike. Many of the novels of John Updike are theological works, but I don't think that they are the property of the church in the way that a hymn is.
Nathan (11:12)
So okay, but so I think this is the important distinction that we need to make because there Moral Streep is not a politically neutral character. I s so so so so okay, yeah.
Cameron (11:21)
Nothing about any of this is politically neutr neutral. I totally recognize that. Yeah.
Nathan (11:25)
So so so as long as we're we're clear on that distinction that it's not a politically neutral move, and we can say there is a reason so so the person who says there seems to be an agenda behind this isn't wrong. The question is,
Cameron (11:37)
No, they're not
Nathan (11:38)
yeah, okay, flesh that out a little bit there, I think.
Cameron (11:41)
Okay. Yeah, is there an agenda behind Well there's there is a gent there's an agenda behind everything. So
Nathan (11:47)
Right.
So you're just saying let's call it the ag So your analysis is is let's say that Christ all Christians could agree, hey, there's an agenda here that seems to be toying with some of our conceptions of the divine. But it's a work of fiction
and of art, so
Cameron (12:04)
It's work of fiction and
art. And it doesn't belong to the church. And it doesn't belong to the fans either. And that's a that's a bigger thing than just the Lewis thing, because if you if you go to debates swirling about the Marvel universe or anything like that, fans do, because of the nature of films and franchises these days, this is a whole different separate conversation, so we don't have to go there. But fans do feel a sense of ownership over something. Now they may feel that sense of ownership, but that in theory.
doesn't really change the question of artistic license. So Greta Gerwig, to my knowledge, is not a Christian. So I when somebody's not a Christian, I don't expect them to behave like a Christian. When somebody who's not a Christian gets their hands on Christian source material, I think we're in for a possibly wild ride. Not always. It depends.
Nathan (12:53)
You're correct, yeah.
Cameron (12:54)
It depends on the director. It depends on the artist. With Greta Gerwig given her, if you I mean I think most people have in mind
Barbie. But she's she's a more she's a fairly complex artist. I mean, she's made a number of different films, and she's also an actress, by the way. So I'm not sure where she'll go there, but my only point there is yes, there'll be a
Nathan (13:12)
So well here here's where we're going with this, I think.
Cameron (13:14)
yeah.
Nathan (13:15)
I is there there's a sense in which you're saying how did you phrase it, the fans aren't the
Cameron (13:21)
Fans don't own the Chronicles of Narnia.
Nathan (13:24)
Correct. And I think the the the question is does the author own the
Cameron (13:33)
No.
Nathan (13:34)
Okay, so this is this is where maybe I I think if we take this apart
Cameron (13:36)
This I mean I again I'm gonna make people
Nathan (13:38)
this will help some here. All right, go.
Cameron (13:39)
Yeah, I'm gonna make people mad. Well it depends it depends on what you mean by own. Own in the sense that they are the they have the original is their intellectual property and and and is even legally their intellectual property. It's copyrighted and all yes, that in that sense, yes. Own in the sense that they get to dictate how everybody else interacts with it and reads it, interprets it, no.
Nathan (14:06)
Okay, but so so
Cameron (14:06)
Necessarily not, right? You wouldn't I mean I don't
think anybody would actually disagree with me there because you can't you can you control human consciousness when it comes to a no. Or so no. Don't own it in that sense. Mm-hmm.
Nathan (14:16)
Okay, so here's here's where the tension might come is
that on one hand you're saying the audience doesn't own the story, and
Cameron (14:23)
Mm-hmm.
Nathan (14:24)
the author doesn't own the story, but
Cameron (14:26)
Mm-hmm.
Nathan (14:26)
the artist does.
Cameron (14:29)
Well
Nathan (14:29)
So so I don't think that's what you're saying, but I think that would be if you said people are going to be frustrated, this might seem like we're
Cameron (14:34)
No, no multiple things are
Nathan (14:36)
prioritizing the art over the author and the original audience.
Cameron (14:39)
No, no, no.
Let's just let's just let's try to honor the complexity of actual life. Multiple things can be true at once, and multiple things are happening at once. There is, so let's say, let's take an original author, C. S. Lewis. C.S. Lewis writes the Chronicles of Narnia. So that exists as he wrote it, and he owns the Chronicles of Narnia in the sense that he owns the books that he wrote, the stories that he wrote.
But then those stories are also out in the world. And so other people will read them in diverse ways, some in with varying degrees of accuracy. So I'm not saying that we don't we don't throw objective truth out here, but there are going to any book that goes out into the world goes out into the jungle of human consciousness. And people Yeah.
Nathan (15:30)
Okay, hang on. There's the difference.
Cameron (15:32)
Sure.
Nathan (15:33)
In that some of this will depend on the degree to which you think the Chronicles of Narnia are an allegory to a deeper reality. So
Cameron (15:45)
Mm-hmm.
Nathan (15:46)
so the so I think that's the so so the people who see the tightest connection between an allegorical reading of the Chronicles of Narnia and the the a a cosmic ontology unfolded in the Christian
conception of reality are going to see are going to have a a harder time with thinking that as you you know what I'm saying so so it's it's
Cameron (16:09)
So hear me careful yeah. Hear me carefully here. Mm-hmm.
Nathan (16:12)
it's it's different with an analogy than it is with
Cameron (16:15)
So look.
Nathan (16:16)
a story and it's a degree to which you think this is an analogy or just a fun story.
Cameron (16:20)
Re reconceiving of Aslan as female, if that is in fact what's gonna happen, I would say she has she h she has the right as an artist to do that, but I would also say it is a misreading of the original source material. But people, these changes do take place. Let me give you can I give you a more mundane example? Or well, a less, I suppose just an example that's less in the sacred category. Just to give you a point of just to give a point of comparison.
So let's take Stephen King. Nobody's work has been more adapted than Stephen King's. But there's one adaptation that he loathes. And it's from one of the greatest directors of all time. That was The Shining. Stanley Kub Kubrick made The Shining famously with Jack Nicholson and turned it into more of a psychological film. The original story is a supernatural tale. But because there were some limitations at the time, this this movie came out in the early, I think it was nineteen eighty.
There were certain s special effects that would look they would just Kubrick knew they would look silly. And so he reconceived it and made it more of a psychologically menacing film. Now I think the film is really like me and a lot of I mean a lot of other people, I think the film was fantastic and but Stephen King hated it because it took artistic liberties with his source material and felt that it was too much of a departure.
So I would say here that Stanley Kubrick took some artistic license and it was in within his he was within his rights to do it. And in this case, I think it worked. But I think he was able to take some of those liberties and still honor the essential spirit of the story. I think you can have other examples where you see that the artist is basically taking such liberties that they are either misinterpreting the source material.
Or basically kind of trying to do a rewrite. So I don't like that by the way. Let me be let me be clear on that. I think the Chronicles of Narnia are great the way they are. But I also think see, we Christians have a problem sometimes with understanding the difference between a f a film and a story because we want something that's that's absolutely step by step faithful, especially when it's something like the Chronicles of or imagine if this were this were
A Netflix adaptation of the Pilgrim Pilgrim's Progress. We would feel I think
Nathan (18:49)
Okay.
Cameron (18:49)
there would be a similarly strong response if there were artistic liberties taken there. But film and that film's a very different medium. So even if something as massive as Zaslan, you know, if that weren't on the table, you still have to make some important sacrifices and decisions to move to a purely visual, visual medium. And
That's and it's that doesn't always that's sometimes the if it's very different on film, it's okay because it's not going to work if you just try to scene by scene capture a book. Yeah.
Nathan (19:28)
What what's
the what's the role in here? do you remember The Shack? And you had I I d I never talked to anybody who had a neutral opinion of the book The Shack. like people either loved it and it was life changing for them, or they thought it was the dumbest thing ever and couldn't figure out how anybody took it remotely serious.
Cameron (19:47)
Mm-hmm.
Yeah.
Nathan (19:50)
So 'cause it and it's feminine portrayal of of of the divine in that.
Cameron (19:55)
Right. Yep.
Nathan (19:59)
Yeah, there's diversity of how people are gonna look at some of these things. Now,
There it is. I'm I'm guessing it's a I c 'cause at the there's there's here's the cynic in me that that pushes back a little bit of saying, I'm I'm kinda with the writers who say, you know, when she said that she's casting Meryl Strep because she wanted somebody who was profound and not pretentious.
Cameron (20:26)
Yeah, Merrill Streep not being pretentious. Come on. Yeah. Yeah. Mm hmm. Sorry.
Nathan (20:29)
Yeah, exact so I mean can you like I tried to say that with a straight face but you broke it for me. Like it
so if you're saying that's your reason and that's clearly not w so what's what's
Cameron (20:41)
I'm so I mean again
Nathan (20:43)
the what's the re like i is this just an analysis of like, hey, we think this movie's gonna make us more money if we can or w what's the I I I don't think
Cameron (20:53)
I don't
Nathan (20:54)
it's I don't think it's that cynical, but it's like
Cameron (20:57)
Well, first of all, I mean, the other thing that Greta Gerwig said is that Meryl Streep is one of the best to do it. So I have to, yeah, due deference. Meryl Streep is an a phenomenal actress. I mean, we're you know, she has a long and storied career. I mean, everything from Sophie's Choice to The Devil Wears Prada, she's she I mean, she really she is a phenom she has gravitas. She she's a really amazing actress. I have to remind myself of the I I have to if I if I'm going to
watch Meryl Streep, I have to not watch any interviews with her. Just
but so sh and so she does have a she's she's an iconic actress. Yeah.
Nathan (21:36)
Ca can the
reputation of a real person ruin the reputation of a fictional character? That that that's a
Cameron (21:42)
yeah, one hundred percent. You you
no, absolutely. There and there are directors who are and directors are aware of that. There are some so I mean, I could give you multiple examples of directors saying, I wanted I love this story and I love this guy for this role, but his persona is too distracting and would have interfered with the audience perception. So they cast somebody who's relatively unknown or I mean, I mentioned Morgan Freeman earlier as kind of a joke because he has this majestic
beautiful, deep voice that would probably be very ideal. I'm sure many people thought yeah.
Nathan (22:17)
it's i i
yeah, it's it's used as a divine voice in multiple Yeah.
Cameron (22:21)
I mean, for
a while the the go to for was James Earl Jones, of course, with his beautiful sonorous voice. I think,
Nathan (22:28)
Mm-hmm.
Cameron (22:28)
you know, I mean goodness, he was he was Mufasa in the Lion King, right? But so I will say this this is a this is an interesting choice. I will be I'm fascinated to see and to see what this is like. There have been some C. S. Lewis scholars who are who are interviewed who are a little bit more circumspect on this. They basically have said, okay.
We need to let's wait and see. It would and they did say it would be very unfortunate if they reconceived as Aslan as female. Now let me put my cards on the table. Yeah, I think so too. I'm not saying that it's good if that's the case. I'm saying that she gets to do that and we don't get to and we don't need to pull our hair hair out and throw a fit. And now we can write critiques and all of it. Yeah, of course. And we can talk about how this is a huge mis this is a very misguided way to look at the source material.
Absolutely. But I f I I I do get a little I I kinda wince a bit. It's a bit cringe worthy. Cringe. There we go. To me when somebody says,
Nathan (23:30)
So so so actually
Cameron (23:32)
and this is why Western civilization is falling apart, I okay. Yeah.
Nathan (23:37)
Y you yeah, you're seeing it as as a bit much. I think so
Cameron (23:40)
Mm-hmm.
Nathan (23:41)
is there
we're I I I want us to push beyond because it is it feels like we're maybe drifting into
Cameron (23:47)
Yeah, yeah. Let's let's move on. Yep.
Nathan (23:50)
what's legal versus what is right. so think about think of let's let's try a another so let's let's imagine there's a beautiful old house next door to the house that you grew up in. And it's a it's a lovely it's been there for all your childhood. You've enjoyed looking at it. You didn't own it, but you really enjoyed looking at the garden and the trees and the way they kept the pa the shutters painted and whatnot. And then
the owners sell it and the new person comes and tears it all down and puts in a concrete blockhouse that's hideous. you you had no legal right to care. I mean you you didn't have it's yeah, like that's how realist no legal right to interfere. Yeah. So s
Cameron (24:31)
Well no no legal right no leg legal right to interfere. You could definitely care. Yeah.
Nathan (24:36)
so that's what I think we're trying to separate out here is is not whether or not the art artist has the right to do it. Yeah, the rights have been sold. They can do it however they want. But you could
So so you would nobody in that situation wouldn't say, that's a shame they cut down all the apple trees in the yard and you like so there there there can be a sense of loss even when it's not a
Cameron (24:55)
Absolutely. And you can h here are the kinds of things
that I think you can you can say this is in poor taste. You can say this is imaginatively harmful. You can say this is taking something bu that was beautiful, like that house, and replacing it with something that is ugly. All of but again, my my my concern here with some of these takes right now is first of all, it just looks like an excuse to throw more content out there.
And they feel a bit catastrophizing.
Nathan (25:26)
The catastrophizing you're never for.
Cameron (25:28)
I don't like that. They're a bit and they're a bit pr they're premature. We don't, we don't yet know. It's not even been released yet. And part of this is also and I just have to if you if you are invested in the culture war, and there is a legitimate argument to be made for that, some people, you know, then this will be a shots fired kind of situation. I have this is a different conversation.
In some ways, Nathan, it's hard for me to see the culture war as anything more than an exercise in futility. So I anyway, I'm that's another that I have to mention that because that's going to be very that that gives context, perhaps, to Cameron. Why is Cameron laying down his arms? Why is he rolling over and playing dead?
Nathan (26:17)
Yeah.
Cameron (26:18)
I don't think I'm rolling over and playing dead. I think it doesn't make any sense to expect
People who are outside the church to behave like Christians. I don't even think it makes much sense to expect them to be to play nice with yeah.
Nathan (26:30)
So okay, so but here's
but here is the here's the follow up then is that if you if you do own the house and you don't want it torn down, don't sell it to somebody who has a different vision. I so
Cameron (26:46)
Well and
Nathan (26:46)
so so I think that would be more in the and maybe the maybe the frustration is misplaced here.
Cameron (26:51)
Well and Greta Gerwig can't so I would have very different feelings if and this is conceivable and I hope it doesn't happen, but if a different if the Chronicles of Narnia were su if somebody wanted to monkey with the actual books and republish them or you know, or publish alternate versions officially, that would be that would be something that would yeah.
Nathan (27:12)
W s that's interesting. Okay,
that's interesting. Well, w we got into this a little bit when we did the Little House on the Prairie episodes where the that was a long time back. But also
Cameron (27:21)
yeah. That's but that was a while ago. Yeah.
Nathan (27:24)
when we reviewed the Barbie movie, we we foretold we we pointed to this moment. We said Yeah. There you go, just there's no hope. The
Cameron (27:29)
Yeah. And I liked the Barbie movie, by the way, so let me just further incriminate myself in the eyes of the audience. Yeah. Yeah.
Nathan (27:38)
I don't know anything about it. The so I
Grateful for Cameron to trudging into the slew of despond and processing that for us.
Cameron (27:47)
But
let me just when I say I like a movie, that does not mean I wholesale endorse everything that that appeared on screen and sign off and everything. No, that's ridiculous. Nobody feels that way about it. Any movie that that you know, if if I said I love Groundhog Day, do I agree with everything that happens in Groundhog Day? No. It's still a great movie.
Nathan (28:05)
Okay, let's let's lay out a couple things before we wrap this up. first of all, just to keep in the back of our minds, I think C. S. Lewis himself, when writing on story, does talk about the difference between a story that is written around a character and a character that is written for a story. And and he sees the second one as a as a better thing and sees basically his
70 year ago vision of slop is when you have an agenda or a character and you try to build a story around that rather than seeing the actual broader mythos being unfolded in the characters that support the development of that story. And so I think that would be a a way of framing this question of is the is the character of Oslan
developed in order to fulfill the the overall story in a certain masculine way that correlates and corresponds to the way in which God has revealed himself in scripture or is this trying to to tweak a character and build a story around that? So we'll keep that in the back of your mind as you're processing whether or not you think there's some 'cause I think there's a lot of w I think so.
Cameron (29:16)
It's it's obviously the former. I mean, he yeah, the whole
thing is yeah, absolutely. So if you change the gender of Aslan, you're gonna change the nature of the story. Yeah. I
Nathan (29:25)
Okay, so that's
Cameron (29:26)
completely concede. And also, again, do I like that? No. Do I think she gets to do that? Yeah. Does that make it right? No. That's it's so essentially that's r that's really all I'm saying.
Nathan (29:35)
Okay. I I I think I don't y
you said you're gonna make people Yeah, I I I don't think you're gonna make as people as mad as as you you think here.
Cameron (29:43)
Not when you not
when it w not when you finally unfold it all. I'm just trying to sit let's let's let's be somewhat consistent in our outrage. Cause we're
Nathan (29:52)
Or
Cameron (29:52)
so primed to get worked up about everything. And I'm saying ye mm.
Nathan (29:55)
Okay. That that's the next episode of
what is it that we want to actually w like I had a kid that for a long time would drop the egg basket. And so you just stop having that kid carry your eggs for a little bit until they get bigger. Okay. Like so so you just gotta decide like who which which basket do you wanna put your eggs in? Literally here. Like pick somebody like if somebody keeps breaking the eggs, don't keep giving them the eggs. That's on me. I can't expect more from them until they're more mature.
Cameron (30:23)
And Hollywood
doesn't get to tell you how to read it. You can you you that's the beautiful thing. If you have most of you have the Chronicles of Narnia on your bookshelves, and you can read those. Go back to the books and read them to your children, read them aloud, and discuss
Nathan (30:39)
Discuss as you go.
Cameron (30:41)
them and let them do their beautiful work that they've been doing all these years. Nob nobody's taking that away from you. And that's really good news. And the the good news here is.
As well, yeah, this thing might have a lot of broad influence and all that, but you don't have to watch it. You really don't. And maybe sit this one out, I don't know.
Nathan (30:56)
So y
yeah, but let me let's let's throw one let me just throw one th theological thought here of maybe how you want to think about not just this film but God and gender and pronouns and the whole thing, which could be its whole own episode. You do have a a significant amount of of flexibility, biblically speaking, on men and women both being created in the image of God. And that is a beautiful statement that
I think has been the platform for the development of human rights, human ethics, and certainly women's rights to say that they're n they're not two distinct values of humanity based on sex and gender that to be made in the image of God both equally are. You get some interesting references to God as El Shaddai, has a a f feminine
so there are a couple of those, Jesus referring to to God as a or himself as a mother hen who longs to gather the chicks under his wings.
Cameron (31:58)
How's it Psalms? He sets
a he sets a table before before me, before my enemies. That's a that would be a feminine act.
Nathan (32:04)
The so
so if you want like hospitality imagery for sure. so to some degree, yes, we don't believe that God has a body that is gendered. Neither no Christians or Jews ever have read the Bible and seen God as a spirit as having a a gendered body. However, it does seem very clear that out of the whole even if you want to say it's cultural ancient Near Eastern framework, that there are a lot of goddesses out there.
gods and goddesses both in equal proportion. and usually the goddess female ones tended to have sexual expressions in their worship and some other things. And for whatever reason, it doesn't even matter. The primary way in which God has made himself known is using masculine imagery, masculine pronouns incarnated in a masculine body, taught us to refer to him
Cameron (32:53)
And he came as Jesus na of Nazareth, yes, yeah. Yeah.
Nathan (32:57)
as father, and there is a whole lot of other imagery.
that goes beyond our socially we could even say socially constructed. I don't know why hospitality has to be feminine. But and
Cameron (33:08)
Right. Yeah.
Nathan (33:09)
in the New Testament, the command to practice hospitality does not go just to women. So th th there there is room here for having a bigger vision of God, but that bigger vision of God cannot be less than the way in which he has revealed himself and asked that we respond to him. And so I think when I see swaps and pronouns within theological context, usually what's happening
is it's a it's not just the change of the pronoun. What's being stated is we don't think this is revelation. We think this is the construction of the patriarchy. And so we're going to fix
Cameron (33:42)
Mm-hmm.
Nathan (33:44)
this developing and evolving story that we're trying to live by rather than saying this is actual divine revelation and God does have a way in which he prefers us to refer to him. So that is probably at the heart of it perhaps the biggest air quotes danger here or or point of confusion
Is to say that when we get into the actual story, is it a is it a human construction or is it a divine revelation? If it's a human construction, then we can change all sorts of things, like a fantasy book about a lion. But if it's divine revelation, then we need to draw some lines out of respect for an ontology that actually exists and us conforming ourselves to it rather than us renaming it to fit our sensibilities that are fleeting for the next.
however many years here. So just to lay out some distinctions
Cameron (34:36)
One well said.
Nathan (34:37)
there that I think just keep those in the back of your mind.
Cameron (34:40)
All right. You've hung with us this long, so congratulations to you. Thank you so much. I hope I didn't alienate you. But if you still like us, then like, share, and subscribe, please, and tell others about it. Be our megaphone. We would really be very eternally grateful. And if you'd like to support us, of course, you can do that by going to www.toltogether.com. We love C.S. Lewis.