SUSAN of NARNIA

Foreword / Disclaimer

First of all, The Chronicles of Narnia are not mine, nor do I intend to try to steal profits from the works of C. S. Lewis. This book is written in the spirit of Screwtape Writes Again by Dr. Walter Martin and I believe that I would be authorized by Lewis himself to write this book, at this point in time, as he is known to have said the following.
"I am delighted to hear that you liked the Narnian books. There is a map at the end of some of them in some editions. But why not do one yourself! And why not write stories for yourself to fill up the gaps in Narnian history? I've left you plenty of hints ... I feel I have done all I can!" -C. S. Lewis, author of The Chronicles of Narnia, responding to a young fan.

It must be understood that, if taken at face value, The Chronicles of Narnia can be a theological cesspool. Though C. S. Lewis tried to tell people that his story is not allegorical, his own words elsewhere prove that he is not being wholly truthful.
Back in 2008, I wrote a paper called Who Is This Aslan? in which I showed the dangers of C. S. Lewis' views. My view has not changed, though I do believe that taking the approach in this book has its merit as well.

As one writer has said,
"According to his creator, Aslan is not an allegory for Christ but the Christ of Narnia. The distinction is vital. Were Aslan only an allegory, a mere stand-in for the hero of the Gospels, he would not engage the reader as he does. In fact, as Lewis explained, Aslan is what the second person of the Trinity (God the Son) might have been like had he been incarnated in a magical world of talking animals and living trees. As such, Aslan takes on a force and a reality that speaks to us through the pages of the Chronicles of Narnia." [ http://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/thinking-about-aslan-and-jesus-with-c-s-lewis ]
My premise in this book is that the Aslan of Narnia is Jesus Himself in our world and that appears consistent with some of Lewis's quotes.

J. R. R. Tolkien disliked The Chronicles of Narnia because he said that C. S. Lewis was, "assembling figures from various mythologies" and that the books "were carelessly and superficially written." [George Sayer, Jack: A Life of C.S. Lewis (2nd ed., 1994), p. 313)] Tolkien, who sought to restore the historical integrity of mythological beings, (found in such works as the Volsunga saga, Beowulf, and Sir Gawain and the Green Knight), appreciated fairy stories and myth but he didn't think they should be made into children's Fairy Tales.

Tolkien was against Lewis' story because it featured both fauns and Father Christmas, dryads and dragons, Baachus and talking animals. Having more respect for mythology Tolkien said that, "[I]f Lucy had really met a faun - that is, a satyr - the result would have been a rape, not a tea party" (Christopher, C.S. Lewis 111).
Lewis did not take the same approach towards his stories, but rather as he said in A Preface to Paradise Lost:
"mythical poetry ought not to attempt novelty in respect of its ingredients" but "[w]hat it does with the ingredients may be as novel as you please"
In my opinion, the major difference between their works is that Lewis at least attempted to introduce children to Jesus even in his mixed up and jumbled fantasy, though he wasn't clear in what he meant a great deal of the time. As much as I admire Tolkien's story, he never eluded to Jesus at all, making his story a much better written but in the end, worthless mythology, as Jesus is REALITY and He just isn't in Middle Earth.
This is strongly contrasted by the following writing of Tolkien, which I wholeheartedly agree with,
"The Gospels contain a fairy-story, or a story of a larger kind which embraces all the essence of fairy-stories. They contain many marvels-peculiarly artistic, beautiful and moving: "mythical" in their perfect, self-contained significance; and among the marvels is the greatest and most complete conceivable eucatastrophe. But this story has entered into History and the primary world; the desire and aspiration of sub-creation has been raised to the fulfilment of Creation. The Birth of Christ is the eucatastrophe of Man's history. The Resurrection is the eucatastrophe of the story of the Incarnation. This story begins and ends in joy. It has pre-eminently the "inner consistency of reality." There is no tale ever told that men would rather find as true, and none which so many sceptical men have accepted as true on its own merits. For the Art of it has the supremely convincing tone of Primary Art, that is, of Creation. To reject it leads either to sadness or to wrath. ... this story is supreme; and it is true. Art has been verified. God is the Lord of angels, and of men, - and of elves. Legend and History have met and fused. ... The Evangelium has not abrogated legends; it has hallowed them, especially the "happy ending." The Christian has still to work, with mind as well as body, to suffer, hope, and die; but he may now perceive that all his bents and faculties have a purpose, which can be redeemed. So great is the bounty with which he has been treated that he may now, perhaps, fairly dare to guess that in Fantasy he may actually assist in the effoliation and multiple enrichment of creation." -J.R.R. Tolkien, On Fairy-Stories, p. 71-73
Suffice it to say that:
"Unto the pure all things are pure: but unto them that are defiled and unbelieving is nothing pure; but even their mind and conscience is defiled." -Titus 1:15
So let's eat the meat and spit out the bones of Lewis' story.

This story, which I have written, is based on the "cosmology" of The Chronicles of Narnia and is written with the intent that it be as lore friendly as possible, but none of it takes place in Narnia as this book follows The Last Battle chronologically and Narnia itself ceased to exist in that book.

Q: Am I qualified to attempt such a work, you might ask?
A: Well, I don't know that I'm any good as a writer, but I have read much of C. S. Lewis' published works, and I both agree and disagree strongly with much of it.
Q: Am I unbiased?
A: Hard to answer. I suppose that my answer would be that of Martin Luther, "My conscience is captive to the Word of God."
I believe that the LORD may have given to me the balanced perspective necessary to write this book in a way that will glorify Him, remain true to the story of C. S. Lewis, and follow much of the same understanding of the supernatural world in which we live, but you are welcome to write your own version if you don't like this rendition. No one has prevented the writing of this story from having been done up to this point in time, and I don't think that it will happen in the future.

The main thing that I wish to address in this work is the heart of the LORD in Matthew 18
"For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost. How think ye? if a man have an hundred sheep, and one of them be gone astray, doth he not leave the ninety and nine, and goeth into the mountains, and seeketh that which is gone astray? And if so be that he find it, verily I say unto you, he rejoiceth more of that sheep, than of the ninety and nine which went not astray. Even so it is not the will of your Father which is in heaven, that one of these little ones should perish."

"The books [The Chronicles of Narnia] don't tell us what happened to Susan. She is left alive in this world at the end [of The Last Battle], having by then turned into a rather silly, conceited young woman. But there's plenty of time for her to mend and perhaps she will get to Aslan's country in the end... in her own way." -C. S. Lewis

Lewis said that the reason why he did not finish the story of Susan was, "[Not that] I have no hope of Susan's ever getting into Aslan's country [Heaven] but because I have a feeling that the story of her journey would be longer and more like a grown-up novel than I wanted to write."
Lewis humbly admitted fallibility in his story, but instead of saying that his fans should just deal with it, he offered the following invitation: "Why not try it yourself?"
In his Companion to Narnia, Paul F. Ford writes at the end of the entry for Susan Pevensie that "Susan's is one of the most important Unfinished Tales of The Chronicles of Narnia", but adds in Footnote 1 for that entry:
"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."

I have also been very frustrated, after hearing that Lewis authorized his fans to write this book, to find that no one has done a version that comes close to His original story though I have seen a lot of fan-fiction out there. I have, therefore, set about to tell the story of Susan of Narnia in the best way that I can.

This book is dedicated to my female cousins

-SCWatchman

If you have any questions regarding this book, please don't hesitate to contact me via my email.
Email: watchid910@gmail.com