This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Recently read a review on Prince Caspian (the movie) and interestingly found that the reviewer noted how Susan's character was already at this point "moving away from Narnia". Apart from seeing Aslan last, the cave wall drawings in the cave that lead to the Stone Table (I am still talking about the movie), there were four images of the Pevensie children: all but Susan's were facing the viewer, whereas hers were turned away. Gonna watch the movie soon and look for this, but do you think it's worth adding? Also (excuse the ongoing post): a quote I dug up: "The books don't tell us what happened. It's very likely that Susan's family's death brought her to think about Narnia. And who knows? She might still stumble across something that would bring her into Narnia, some time, some day .... we'll just have to wait and see...." Worth anything? EDIT: And of course, the famous line of Aslan "Once a King or Queen of Narnia, always a King or Queen of Narnia." Hackeru ( talk) 16:02, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
I apparently seem to have mistaken Wikipedia for Everything2, but while we're on the subject I'd like to tell the critics to cool off. To say that Susan was excluded because of her female sexuality going for the burn would cause a fundamental conflict with other themes - Frith, look at the good Calormenian. Near as I can tell, it's the 'nothing except' more than the 'nylons...' Also there's a good chance that she didn't end up in Aslan's World because she's still present on Earth, but that's getting irrelevant. Anyway, I'd edit the paragraph in a fanatical pursuit of NPOV to include her dismissal of Narnia had I an English copy of the book. -- Kizor 08:17, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)
in the last issue of TIME magazine, J.K. Rowling was interviewed, saying she has a problem with this chracter(or, more to the point, with Lewis himself), maybe that could be inserted as well 85.65.36.121
can we put a character templates in narnia character articles? i've seen harry potter and others, and maybe narnia deserve to have it as well. HoneyBee 23:29, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
Actually, I believe that the character in Gaiman's story is never explicitly given a first name. She is "Professor Hastings", and the young reporter never mentions any coincidence of name when discussing the similarities between the professor's family and the one on the Narnia books. We are left to draw our own conclusions about who the professor is. Or have I missed something? Leeborkman 03:48, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
Wow, how sad can you apologists get? Stretching it as much as you can does not remove the fact it was Susan Pevensie. Especially when the author states it was. 203.171.196.57 ( talk) 16:58, 9 September 2009 (UTC) Sutter Cane
In my copy of Fragile Things (UK paperback published by Headline Review) there is a section at the beginning which discusses all of the stories in the book and this includes The Problem of Susan. Excerpt: "I read the Narnia books to myself hundreds of times as a boy, and then aloud as an adult, twice, to my children. There is so much in the books that I love, but each time I found the disposal of Susan to be intensely problematic and deeply irritating. I suppose I wanted to write a story that would be equally problematic,and just as much of an irritant, if from a different direction, and to talk about the remarkable power of children's literature". -- Joshtek ( talk) 14:28, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
Of course, since Susan was quoted as being "no good at school work" it would be quite the turn-around for her to become not merely an able scholar but a Professor, no less. Losing her entire family must have given her no end of a kick in the rear end, but it's still quite something to have miraculously developed the aptitude for professorhood, no matter the motivation. :) Captain Pedant ( talk) 13:16, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
The photo of Susan has funny bits of text around it - it has "Image:" on the left, and "|240px" on the right (with square brackets). Does anyone know how to fix it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr Tumnus ( talk • contribs) 22:36, 5 November 2007 (UTC) Sorry! Mr Tumnus 22:42, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
It still looks wrong. I can see the word "Image:" above it, and "|240px]]" below it. Please, can somebody fix it? Mr Tumnus 11:47, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. It looks fine now. Mr Tumnus 20:42, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
I Love You so very,very,very,much Anna popplewell —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.91.59.140 ( talk) 03:08, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
The section of this entry here is nothing more than special pleading, which has no real place in a wiki article.
This is not to say, as some critics have maintained, that she is lost forever ... It is a mistake to think that Susan was killed in the railway accident at the end of The Last Battle and that she has forever fallen from grace. It is to be assumed, rather, that as a woman of twenty-one who has just lost her entire family in a terrible crash, she will have much to work through; in the process, she might change to become truly the gentle person she has the potential for being.
The fact that Peter states that she isn't a friend of Narnia and how no one actually speaks to her states that she is not there in the railway crash. That there are no sections of the Last Battle that even remotely suggest that Susan is going to be given a repieve from what Peter and-apparently-Aslan have placed upon her. 'she is no longer a friend of Narina' 'lipsticks, nylons and invitations' are both rather harsh and set in stone terms. The First being that she's no longer welcome in 'Aslans Country' and the second-though rather thinly defended-states that an empowered woman who embraces her sexuality is something sick and wrong. Something that is 'unnatural' which fits with the common 'sex is bad' view in orthadox Abrahamic faith systems. Lightningbarer ( talk) 23:05, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
rofl! Captain Pendant, it is amusing that you think youth is the "silliest stage of life" and furthermore think it is bad to want to stay youthful as long as possible. Is that not the dream? *winks* -- 50.33.53.134 ( talk) 23:50, 10 September 2015 (UTC)
The fact that Susan was not killed in the train crash, but, remained the sole survivor of the Penvensie family means that she has time to repent of her falling away. "No longer a friend" can be said of anybody who falls away from their religious faith, during that time period, but, in less it becomes permanent, the friendship can be restored again. Edmund started out as an ENEMY of Narnia & of Aslan, but, in the end was Saved. The same thing can happen with Susan too. Even CS Lewis himself, said so.-- Splashen ( talk) 23:44, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Is it standard to focus on the film portrayal of a character? Since this page is specifically about the character in general an illustration from the books (if one exists) or no image at all would seem more appropriate, but maybe that's just me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.184.163.7 ( talk) 22:30, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
The summary of her character should focus on what the book says. The only outside sources workable there are published timelines, etc. by Lewis himself and scholarly studies of the character, not editings from the film. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 03:31, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Recently read a review on Prince Caspian (the movie) and interestingly found that the reviewer noted how Susan's character was already at this point "moving away from Narnia". Apart from seeing Aslan last, the cave wall drawings in the cave that lead to the Stone Table (I am still talking about the movie), there were four images of the Pevensie children: all but Susan's were facing the viewer, whereas hers were turned away. Gonna watch the movie soon and look for this, but do you think it's worth adding? Also (excuse the ongoing post): a quote I dug up: "The books don't tell us what happened. It's very likely that Susan's family's death brought her to think about Narnia. And who knows? She might still stumble across something that would bring her into Narnia, some time, some day .... we'll just have to wait and see...." Worth anything? EDIT: And of course, the famous line of Aslan "Once a King or Queen of Narnia, always a King or Queen of Narnia." Hackeru ( talk) 16:02, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
I apparently seem to have mistaken Wikipedia for Everything2, but while we're on the subject I'd like to tell the critics to cool off. To say that Susan was excluded because of her female sexuality going for the burn would cause a fundamental conflict with other themes - Frith, look at the good Calormenian. Near as I can tell, it's the 'nothing except' more than the 'nylons...' Also there's a good chance that she didn't end up in Aslan's World because she's still present on Earth, but that's getting irrelevant. Anyway, I'd edit the paragraph in a fanatical pursuit of NPOV to include her dismissal of Narnia had I an English copy of the book. -- Kizor 08:17, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)
in the last issue of TIME magazine, J.K. Rowling was interviewed, saying she has a problem with this chracter(or, more to the point, with Lewis himself), maybe that could be inserted as well 85.65.36.121
can we put a character templates in narnia character articles? i've seen harry potter and others, and maybe narnia deserve to have it as well. HoneyBee 23:29, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
Actually, I believe that the character in Gaiman's story is never explicitly given a first name. She is "Professor Hastings", and the young reporter never mentions any coincidence of name when discussing the similarities between the professor's family and the one on the Narnia books. We are left to draw our own conclusions about who the professor is. Or have I missed something? Leeborkman 03:48, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
Wow, how sad can you apologists get? Stretching it as much as you can does not remove the fact it was Susan Pevensie. Especially when the author states it was. 203.171.196.57 ( talk) 16:58, 9 September 2009 (UTC) Sutter Cane
In my copy of Fragile Things (UK paperback published by Headline Review) there is a section at the beginning which discusses all of the stories in the book and this includes The Problem of Susan. Excerpt: "I read the Narnia books to myself hundreds of times as a boy, and then aloud as an adult, twice, to my children. There is so much in the books that I love, but each time I found the disposal of Susan to be intensely problematic and deeply irritating. I suppose I wanted to write a story that would be equally problematic,and just as much of an irritant, if from a different direction, and to talk about the remarkable power of children's literature". -- Joshtek ( talk) 14:28, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
Of course, since Susan was quoted as being "no good at school work" it would be quite the turn-around for her to become not merely an able scholar but a Professor, no less. Losing her entire family must have given her no end of a kick in the rear end, but it's still quite something to have miraculously developed the aptitude for professorhood, no matter the motivation. :) Captain Pedant ( talk) 13:16, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
The photo of Susan has funny bits of text around it - it has "Image:" on the left, and "|240px" on the right (with square brackets). Does anyone know how to fix it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr Tumnus ( talk • contribs) 22:36, 5 November 2007 (UTC) Sorry! Mr Tumnus 22:42, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
It still looks wrong. I can see the word "Image:" above it, and "|240px]]" below it. Please, can somebody fix it? Mr Tumnus 11:47, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. It looks fine now. Mr Tumnus 20:42, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
I Love You so very,very,very,much Anna popplewell —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.91.59.140 ( talk) 03:08, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
The section of this entry here is nothing more than special pleading, which has no real place in a wiki article.
This is not to say, as some critics have maintained, that she is lost forever ... It is a mistake to think that Susan was killed in the railway accident at the end of The Last Battle and that she has forever fallen from grace. It is to be assumed, rather, that as a woman of twenty-one who has just lost her entire family in a terrible crash, she will have much to work through; in the process, she might change to become truly the gentle person she has the potential for being.
The fact that Peter states that she isn't a friend of Narnia and how no one actually speaks to her states that she is not there in the railway crash. That there are no sections of the Last Battle that even remotely suggest that Susan is going to be given a repieve from what Peter and-apparently-Aslan have placed upon her. 'she is no longer a friend of Narina' 'lipsticks, nylons and invitations' are both rather harsh and set in stone terms. The First being that she's no longer welcome in 'Aslans Country' and the second-though rather thinly defended-states that an empowered woman who embraces her sexuality is something sick and wrong. Something that is 'unnatural' which fits with the common 'sex is bad' view in orthadox Abrahamic faith systems. Lightningbarer ( talk) 23:05, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
rofl! Captain Pendant, it is amusing that you think youth is the "silliest stage of life" and furthermore think it is bad to want to stay youthful as long as possible. Is that not the dream? *winks* -- 50.33.53.134 ( talk) 23:50, 10 September 2015 (UTC)
The fact that Susan was not killed in the train crash, but, remained the sole survivor of the Penvensie family means that she has time to repent of her falling away. "No longer a friend" can be said of anybody who falls away from their religious faith, during that time period, but, in less it becomes permanent, the friendship can be restored again. Edmund started out as an ENEMY of Narnia & of Aslan, but, in the end was Saved. The same thing can happen with Susan too. Even CS Lewis himself, said so.-- Splashen ( talk) 23:44, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Is it standard to focus on the film portrayal of a character? Since this page is specifically about the character in general an illustration from the books (if one exists) or no image at all would seem more appropriate, but maybe that's just me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.184.163.7 ( talk) 22:30, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
The summary of her character should focus on what the book says. The only outside sources workable there are published timelines, etc. by Lewis himself and scholarly studies of the character, not editings from the film. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 03:31, 2 February 2020 (UTC)