Why didn't Susan appear in the Last Battle?

In article <nwfNh.75$Px4.16@newsfe12.lga>, AJA <ahnemann.RemoveThis@optonline.net> wrote:
>> BTW, it's not as though Susan were barred from Heaven forever. When TLB
>> closes, she can still be going to make over at some point in Earth's
>> future. Lewis nowhere says that she is a bad or malicious adult, just
>> very silly, which people sometimes get over.
>
>Absolutely. It is very interesting that people do get so worked up about
>poor Susan. I guess that's a testament to CSL that he's depicted such a
>real person in Susan that one cares very much what happens to her.

Susan, a real person? No, I don't think that can be supported, either
from the text or from listening to people's reactions. Do you ever see
people reminiscing "Wow, I'll never forget that striking scene where
Susan said... or Susan did..."? Can you, right now from memory without
looking in the books, describe any particular vivid scene where Susan
*does* something, revealing character? -- such as the scene where Lucy
reads the magician's book, or Jill knocks Eustace off the mountain
and has to confess to it. I'm not sure if we even get Susan's point
of view for more than a sentence at a time.

It's *Narnia* as a whole that's real, and even more, the questions --
how could someone go to Narnia and then reject it? Why? *Then* what?
-- those are very real, and Lewis didn't give us much of an answer, at
least within Narnia, though of course he addressed them in other books.
And we want answers.

> What you
>say above is the very point. Susan's story goes on.

And people want to know it! I bet there's more fanfic on
Susan-afterward than everything else in Narnia put together.
 >> Stay informed about: Why didn't Susan appear in the Last Battle? 

Michael J Davis <?.?@trustsof.demon.co.uk> wrote in
news:6j4HHvBp0MFGFwOG@trustsof.demon.co.uk.invalid:

....
> I think of it being the end (quite apart from the title) as we have
> all the other peoples there. In that case Susan doesn't have a future.
> And lipstick and nylons is metaphor for more grievous abandonment of
> Narnian ideals. They are *children's* books after all!
>
> Mike

I suppose you could look at it that way -- the childhood of all of them is,
in TLB, shown to have irrevocably ended. Susan happens to have gone the
more usual and harder route. Instead of a spirit who has passed to the joys
of paradise, she remains behind to deal with our world as best she can.
(The train crash deprived her of parents and three fairly close siblings
when she was a young adult. She would then be alone to face the
consequences of death on the living -- this at a time when, no matter how
grown-up she felt herself to be, she could very much have used some support
and counsel.)

However, mentioning Susan's sudden plight would be wrenchingly,
destroyingly out of place in a children's book -- even if it were *not* a
fairly exact Christian allegory which showed how things' and persons' ends,
while perhaps deserving of mourning, are not necessarily the end of their
"true" stories.

IMO Lewis places Susan among the yet unsaved (along with the billions on
Earth) because she is -- begging your pardon Bree and notwithstanding the
archery contest with Trumpkin -- the *least* fully characterized of the
Pevensie children and so least likely to be missed.

I think any further fiction that chronicles Susan's life must be on an
entirely different level, as was *Huckleberry Finn* (with the protagonist
coming to realize that some of the unquestioned bases of his society were
wrong) from *Tom Sawyer* (depicting the triumphs & tragedies of childhood
in that society).

Susan's story is incomplete, but her childhood is done for right enough --
by her own prior choices before TLB began, and also by the train crash in
which she is seen to have lost her immediate family.

The Narnian series, on the other hand, must finish pretty much where it
does -- with the historical Narnia a cold, lifeless waste behind a locked
door, the story of which is definitely over, while almost all the
characters we cared are rushing farther in to an ever-increasing joy among
the eternal countries of the Real.

The answer to the question of whether something like this "actually
happened" must depend, not on reason, but ultimately on faith, as always.

RA
 >> Stay informed about: Why didn't Susan appear in the Last Battle? 

On Thu, 05 Apr 2007 18:34:08 GMT, Roberto Abajo wrote:
> Michael J Davis <?.?@trustsof.demon.co.uk> wrote in
> news:6j4HHvBp0MFGFwOG@trustsof.demon.co.uk.invalid:
/snip/

> I suppose you could look at it that way -- the childhood of all of them is,
> in TLB, shown to have irrevocably ended. Susan happens to have gone the
> more usual and harder route. Instead of a spirit who has passed to the joys
> of paradise, she remains behind to deal with our world as best she can.
> (The train crash deprived her of parents and three fairly close siblings
> when she was a young adult. She would then be alone to face the
> consequences of death on the living -- this at a time when, no matter how
> grown-up she felt herself to be, she could very much have used some support
> and counsel.)
>
> However, mentioning Susan's sudden plight would be wrenchingly,
> destroyingly out of place in a children's book

True -- which is another reason the whole thing is a flaw, imo. To avoid
the impression of Susan being damned (and of her siblings not even ASKING
about her when they saw their parents), they could ask and Aslan could say
something like what Lewis said in the letter -- but it would have to be
done briefly and lightly so as to distract attention from thinking of her
bereavement etc.



/snip/

> IMO Lewis places Susan among the yet unsaved (along with the billions on
> Earth) because she is -- begging your pardon Bree and notwithstanding the
> archery contest with Trumpkin -- the *least* fully characterized of the
> Pevensie children and so least likely to be missed.

Do you mean Lewis wanted a token apostate and chose Susan because she was
expendable literary-wise?

I beg to disagree. Lucy is the most interesting, but imo Susan is next
most interesting: she has a conflict of tenderheartedness vs practicality,
and of a bit of cowardice vs the appeal of magic and adventure. Peter is a
flat character, never changing, no internal conflicts; and Edmund has
scarcely any character after LWW.


Bree
 >> Stay informed about: Why didn't Susan appear in the Last Battle? 

"Bree" <no.DeleteThis@no.com> wrote in message
news:3snfjqcrp7ol.1klb96h6cmgfc$.dlg@40tude.net...
> Good point. Imo that's because it's a loose end, a literary flaw, but I
> won't rant more about that.

Aren't we all, Christians and non alike 'loose ends'? Not a bad thing to
have folks wonder about such as Susan, no? What is salvation; what do any
of us think about our own?

Blessings,
Ann
 >> Stay informed about: Why didn't Susan appear in the Last Battle? 

Bree <no.TakeThisOut@no.com> wrote:
>On Thu, 5 Apr 2007 08:54:18 +0000 (UTC), Katie Schwarz wrote:
>> Can you, right now from memory without
>> looking in the books, describe any particular vivid scene where Susan
>> *does* something, revealing character?
>
>Yes. In PRINCE CASPIAN, when they're having the contests with Trumpkin (aka
>DLF) Susan beats him in archery but says the target must have moved,
>because "she hated hurting anyone's feelings." quote from memory. I liked
>this picture of her very much.

OK, I have to give you that. Caspian was the only one I never reread;
it struck me as a retread of the first one. Narnia has *again* been
conquered by evil outsiders and we have to revolt and restore the rightful
ruler *again*. But you're right about the scene.

I thought that if anyone came up with anything, it would have been the
vigil at Aslan's death -- but there Susan and Lucy aren't really
distinguished except when the mice appear and Susan says "yuck" but
Lucy recognizes they're chewing off Aslan's muzzle.

I have to admit, Susan does have a personality in _Caspian_, which
I hadn't remembered. I do still think the great outcry is not so much
because *she* is loved and remembered, as because her rejection is
painted so harshly, without a single word of sympathy. But more on that
in another post.

>In LION she's a bit of a wet blanket, in the last part where they are
>grown up in Narnia and out riding and see something that the others want to
>explore but she has a bad feeling about it: and she's right, it takes them
>back to England in WWII.
>
>In PRINCE CASPIAN she's strongly against following Lucy's glimpse of Aslan
>at the camp, and when they get to Aslan he says "You have listened to
>fears."
> ...
>He shows her as less adventurous, but I don't recall any hints of lipstick
>and nylons till LAST BATTLE.

True. In fact it's Jill who is wowed by the witch's "scrumptious
dress", and Polly who is impressed by how much money the Charn
royalty's clothing must have cost.

>> ... I bet there's more fanfic on
>> Susan-afterward than everything else in Narnia put together.
>
>
>Good point. Imo that's because it's a loose end, a literary flaw, but I
>won't rant more about that. But it could be very interesting (if fanfic
>were legal) to show her trying to get back in, or at least trying to find
>her lost memories.

Legal or not, lots of versions of that are posted on the web.
 >> Stay informed about: Why didn't Susan appear in the Last Battle? 

On Apr 6, 10:29 am, Bree <n....TakeThisOut@no.com> wrote:

> True -- which is another reason the whole thing is a flaw, imo. To avoid
> the impression of Susan being damned (and of her siblings not even ASKING
> about her when they saw their parents), they could ask and Aslan could say
> something like what Lewis said in the letter -- but it would have to be
> done briefly and lightly so as to distract attention from thinking of her
> bereavement etc.

> Bree

Problem is - it is NOT a flaw from Lewis' point. To him, Susan is a
traitor, and deserves to be forgotten and abandoned wo=ithout any
chances.
 >> Stay informed about: Why didn't Susan appear in the Last Battle? 

> True -- which is another reason the whole thing is a flaw, imo. To avoid
> the impression of Susan being damned (and of her siblings not even ASKING
> about her when they saw their parents), they could ask and Aslan could say
> something like what Lewis said in the letter -- but it would have to be
> done briefly and lightly so as to distract attention from thinking of her
> bereavement etc.

>
> Bree

Point is it is not a flaw in Lewis' eyes. To him, Susan is a traitor
worth being forgotten and left behind without any chances. That's what
you get if you reject Christian authority...
 >> Stay informed about: Why didn't Susan appear in the Last Battle? 

On Apr 6, 10:29 am, Bree <n....TakeThisOut@no.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 05 Apr 2007 18:34:08 GMT, Roberto Abajo wrote:
> > Michael J Davis <?...@trustsof.demon.co.uk> wrote in
> >news:6j4HHvBp0MFGFwOG@trustsof.demon.co.uk.invalid:
>
> /snip/
>
> > I suppose you could look at it that way -- the childhood of all of them is,
> > in TLB, shown to have irrevocably ended. Susan happens to have gone the
> > more usual and harder route. Instead of a spirit who has passed to the joys
> > of paradise, she remains behind to deal with our world as best she can.
> > (The train crash deprived her of parents and three fairly close siblings
> > when she was a young adult. She would then be alone to face the
> > consequences of death on the living -- this at a time when, no matter how
> > grown-up she felt herself to be, she could very much have used some support
> > and counsel.)
>
> > However, mentioning Susan's sudden plight would be wrenchingly,
> > destroyingly out of place in a children's book
>
> True -- which is another reason the whole thing is a flaw, imo. To avoid
> the impression of Susan being damned (and of her siblings not even ASKING
> about her when they saw their parents), they could ask and Aslan could say
> something like what Lewis said in the letter -- but it would have to be
> done briefly and lightly so as to distract attention from thinking of her
> bereavement etc.
>
> /snip/
>
> > IMO Lewis places Susan among the yet unsaved (along with the billions on
> > Earth) because she is -- begging your pardon Bree and notwithstanding the
> > archery contest with Trumpkin -- the *least* fully characterized of the
> > Pevensie children and so least likely to be missed.
>
> Do you mean Lewis wanted a token apostate and chose Susan because she was
> expendable literary-wise?
>
> I beg to disagree. Lucy is the most interesting, but imo Susan is next
> most interesting: she has a conflict of tenderheartedness vs practicality,
> and of a bit of cowardice vs the appeal of magic and adventure. Peter is a
> flat character, never changing, no internal conflicts; and Edmund has
> scarcely any character after LWW.
>
> Bree



Point is it is not a flaw in Lewis' eyes. To him, Susan is a traitor
worth being forgotten and left behind without any chances. That's what
you get if you reject Christian authority...
 >> Stay informed about: Why didn't Susan appear in the Last Battle? 

SS13 wrote:

> On Apr 6, 10:29 am, Bree <n... RemoveThis @no.com> wrote:
>
> > True -- which is another reason the whole thing is a flaw, imo. To avoid
> > the impression of Susan being damned (and of her siblings not even ASKING
> > about her when they saw their parents), they could ask and Aslan could say
> > something like what Lewis said in the letter -- but it would have to be
> > done briefly and lightly so as to distract attention from thinking of her
> > bereavement etc.
>
> > Bree
>
> Problem is - it is NOT a flaw from Lewis' point. To him, Susan is a
> traitor, and deserves to be forgotten and abandoned wo=ithout any
> chances.

I still find it untenable that Peter, Edmund, and Lucy don't seem bothered by
Susan's absence from Narnia Heaven.
 >> Stay informed about: Why didn't Susan appear in the Last Battle? 

Malcolm wrote:

> <rja.carnegie.DeleteThis@excite.com> wrote
> >> >
> >> > We don't see her in Aslan's country because she is *alive*. She's not
> >> > in Hell, she is in England.
> >> >
> >> Yes, she wasn't the one who decided not to buy a ticket on the train that
> >> crashed, killing Peter, Edmund and Lucy. Lewis decided that.
> >
> > But being alive isn't an obstacle to visiting Narnia. They were always
> > alive before, and it only meant that they had to go back. What seems
> > to matter more is that Susan is an apostate - former - Narnian, which
> > is a metaphor or allegory for an apostate - former - Christian. There
> > are bible verses that say that when you're out, your friends on the
> > inside should give up on winning you back.
> >
> The point is that Lewis could have decided, without doing any violence to
> the plot, to have Susan die in the train accident and then be one of the
> creatures who reject Aslan at the stable door. He didn't. We know Susan
> isn't there, but we don't know what becomes of her ultimately.

I'm surprised that Lucy didn't cite Susan's absence as an obstacle to
being perfectly happy in Narnia Heaven!
 >> Stay informed about: Why didn't Susan appear in the Last Battle? 

In article <47BEA14D.7693CCA4.TakeThisOut@pop.dcn.davis.ca.us>,
Tim Bruening <tsbrueni.TakeThisOut@pop.dcn.davis.ca.us> wrote:
>
>I'm surprised that Lucy didn't cite Susan's absence as an obstacle to
>being perfectly happy in Narnia Heaven!

Oh, that wouldn't happen at all. (See his _The Great Divorce_
for a longer treatment of that theme.) And there's no reason
to think Susan won't go to Heaven when she eventually dies; she
simply won't see it as Narnia. In fact, by the time the book
ends her siblings may no longer see it as Narnia, since they no
longer see Aslan as a Lion.

Dorothy J. Heydt
Albany, California
djheydt.TakeThisOut@kithrup.com
 >> Stay informed about: Why didn't Susan appear in the Last Battle? 

"Peter B. Juul" wrote:

> Tim Bruening <tsbrueni.DeleteThis@pop.dcn.davis.ca.us> writes:
>
> > Since nuns are sworn to poverty, this shouldn't be a problem!
>
> afaik, she wanted all the profits to go to charity, something the
> estate was unwilling to accept.

What does the estate have against charity?
 >> Stay informed about: Why didn't Susan appear in the Last Battle? 

Lawrence Watt-Evans wrote:

> On 03 Jan 2006 21:19:24 -0700, Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer RemoveThis @cs.nmsu.edu>
> wrote:
>
> >Tim Bruening <tsbrueni RemoveThis @pop.dcn.davis.ca.us> writes:
> >
> >> David Johnston wrote:
> >> >
> >> > He wrote Narnia novels after the Mouse, so his copyright will never
> >> > expire.
> >>
> >> What does a Talking Mouse have to do with the copyright?
> >
> >Unlike Sir James Barrie's estate, Disney hasn't been able to get the
> >Mouse specifically exempted from normal copyright law. So every
> >extension they've gotten for the sake of their cash cow (money Mouse?)
> >has had the effect of extending copyright on everything written since,
> >as well.
>
> Sigh.
>
> Yes, Disney lobbied for the 1998 Copyright Extension Act.
>
> However, the Sonny Bono Copyright Extension Act was created in
> response to Germany extending copyright by twenty years, and Disney
> did _not_ campaign in Germany -- the State of Bavaria, which owns the
> German-language rights to _Mein Kampf_ and has been actively
> suppressing it, did.

How did Bavaria obtain the German language rights to Mein Kampf? Who owns
the English language rights?
 >> Stay informed about: Why didn't Susan appear in the Last Battle?