XPost: rec.arts.books.tolkien, alt.books.cs-lewis, rec.arts.books.childrens   
   XPost: rec.arts.sf.written   
      
   In rec.arts.books.tolkien nystulc@cs.com wrote:   
   > stephen@nomail.com wrote:   
   >> Here is the definition of 'allegory' from Wordnet 2.0, copyright 2003   
   >> 	Princeton University   
   >>   
   >> allegory   
   >>   
   >> n 1: a short moral story (often with animal characters) [syn: fable,   
   parable,   
   >> apologue] 2: a visible symbol representing an abstract idea [syn: emblem]   
   >> 3: an expressive style that uses fictional characters and events to describe   
   >> some subject by suggestive resemblances; an extended metaphor   
   >>   
   >> tLW&tW seems to have a bit of all three of these definitions,   
   >> especially the third given how much ground "suggestive resemblances"   
   >> covers.  Aslan's sacrifice to redeem Edmund surely has suggestive   
   >> resemblances to Christ's sacrifice to redeem mankind.   
      
   > You have over-applied definition three (I won't discuss the others).   
   > All stories have suggestive resemblances.  Your interpretation   
   > therefore in effect turns "allegory" into a synonym for "story" and   
   > deprives it of any specific meaning as a term of classification.   
      
   > Your mistake is to focus on the word "suggestive resemblance" while   
   > ignoring the other words of the definition.  By itself, "suggestive   
   > resemblance" covers far too much ground (as you yourself note). The   
   > suggestive resemblance must have a specific *purpose* -- namely the   
   > portrayal of a subject (obviously a different subject -- other than the   
   > overt subject of the story itself).  I would also argue that that   
   > purpose must be primary or at least highly significant, or else the   
   > distinction will be meaningless.  This is confirmed by what follows the   
   > semicolon.  Please also note that when one part of a definition is   
   > separated from another by a semicolon, one should not interpret the   
   > first part without reference to the second part; each part is intended   
   > to support and clarify the other.  When we refer to what follows the   
   > semicolon, we learn (1) the suggestive resemblance should have the   
   > quality of a metaphor (rather than a simile or an analogy), (2) a   
   > isolated metaphor within a broader work will not qualify.   
      
   I am not ignoring any part of the definition.  The question   
   is, does Lewis use "an expressive style that uses fictional characters   
   and events to describe some subject by suggestive resemblances;   
   an extended metaphor".  Aslan and Edmund and all the rest   
   are fictional characters, and their going to Narnia and Aslan's death   
   are fictional events, and they describe the subject of   
   Christianity and redemption by means of the Crucifixion.   
   So the answer is quite clearly 'yes'.   
      
   > Lewis has made clear that Aslan was not intended as a metaphor, much   
   > less an extended metaphor.   
      
   Yes but the author does not get to dictate how his story   
   is to be read.  He may have not have intended Aslan to   
   be a metaphor, but as written he can be clearly read as one.   
      
   > Lewis makes clear that the story he tells   
   > is primarily about itself; it is intended to be its own story, however   
   > much it may be inspired by the other story (to which it does indeed   
   > bear some resemblance).  It does not fit definition three -- at least,   
   > it fits no better than all stories fit.   
      
   It fits far better than most stories.   
      
   > Shakespear's "Hamlet" had a suggestive resemblence to previously   
   > written stories about Hamlet.  It also has a suggestive resemblance to   
   > many real life events.  That alone, is not sufficient to make it an   
   > allegory.   
      
   It fits the definition I quoted.  If you have a different   
   definition of 'allegory' please quote it and the source.   
      
   Stephen   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)