I'm not sure I can help with the cognitive dissonance. I can suggest that you do as GeofferyF and suppose that Christianity is true in the universe that Narnia inhabits, even if you don't believe it exists in this universe.
The thing is, I don't see any need to go that route, because as I have been saying, the books work without that supposition. If a book works when read under more than one set of assumptions, then each of those interpretations is just as valid as the other, no matter which one the author intended to write.
-----
I can't help you with feeling as if you are falsely proselytizing if you write Aslan as Christ. The thing is, many if not most of Aslan's attributes are Christ's: if you write Aslan as Aslan, and stay true to canon, you fall into that trap regardless because, just as many people read Aslan in CoN as Christ, they'll read your story and, if Aslan is written like Aslan, they'll see it in your fic as well.
And I am okay with that! Just as I can interpret Lewis's books without considering Aslan an analogue of Jesus, other people can interpret any portrayal of Aslan that I write as if he is Jesus, whether that's what I was thinking as I wrote or not. It would be hypocritical of me to suggest otherwise. *grin* I just can't write with that interpretation held in my mind.
-----
I think I mentioned it somewhere else, but since the Narnian world is not our world, the incarnation and the passion would be different: that's what Lewis is saying. It's not a one-to-one correlation because there worlds don't correlate one-to-one. And, as I mentioned, Lewis didn't start out intending to write Aslan as Christ: it just happened over time, so his characterization of Aslan in LWW was a little off.
And I think that lack of strict one-to-one correlation is what allows the books to be read as if there is no correlation at all. The parallels are there if you approach the books from a certain point of view, but they vanish or twist if your initial point of view is different.
I do wonder, actually, if the 'variant' characterization of Aslan in LWW might be one reason Lewis eventually said the books should be read in internal chronological order. Because if your first impression of Aslan is from LWW, you're much more likely to miss the Christian underpinnings than if you first meet him creating a world and a garden that has a Tree of Life. *grin* (I still think publication order is best, regardless of what that does to people's view of the religious subtext in the series, because LWW stands alone much better than MN, and is much more likely to lure people into reading further.)
-----
If I were to write in the Northern Lights fandom (and I don't, I petered out after the first book), I would have to take Pullman's consideration when creating that world in mind when writing in it. I couldn't have the faux!Catholic church represent anything other than what Pullman sees as a corrupt church in our own world, despite the fact that I disagree with him vastly. But to do otherwise would be un-canon. I could create a splinter group within the church which worked for good, but I could not change the foundation of it.
I don't blame you for petering out; the first book is by far the most boring of the three. And while Pullman is in some ways more technically skilled than Lewis (there are fewer holes in his world-building and his characters are more rounded), he's much less successful at subordinating his ideology to his story. I can read Narnia as pagan if I want too; Lewis left that space for interpretation in his books. I cannot read His Dark Materials as anything other than an attack on organized religion in general and the Catholic church in particular. And that annoys me, because while I am not Christian, I am religious and an active member of my local Unitarian Universalist congregation, and I dislike it when people focus only on the failings and flaws of organized religion and disregard all its virtues and benefits.
(I do love the ending, though, because Pullman doesn't cheat. He obeys the rules he set up at the beginning, and the resulting bittersweet ache is more attractive to me than any loophole-produced happy ending could be.)
on theology, ethics, and authorial intent, part 3
The thing is, I don't see any need to go that route, because as I have been saying, the books work without that supposition. If a book works when read under more than one set of assumptions, then each of those interpretations is just as valid as the other, no matter which one the author intended to write.
-----
I can't help you with feeling as if you are falsely proselytizing if you write Aslan as Christ. The thing is, many if not most of Aslan's attributes are Christ's: if you write Aslan as Aslan, and stay true to canon, you fall into that trap regardless because, just as many people read Aslan in CoN as Christ, they'll read your story and, if Aslan is written like Aslan, they'll see it in your fic as well.
And I am okay with that! Just as I can interpret Lewis's books without considering Aslan an analogue of Jesus, other people can interpret any portrayal of Aslan that I write as if he is Jesus, whether that's what I was thinking as I wrote or not. It would be hypocritical of me to suggest otherwise. *grin* I just can't write with that interpretation held in my mind.
-----
I think I mentioned it somewhere else, but since the Narnian world is not our world, the incarnation and the passion would be different: that's what Lewis is saying. It's not a one-to-one correlation because there worlds don't correlate one-to-one. And, as I mentioned, Lewis didn't start out intending to write Aslan as Christ: it just happened over time, so his characterization of Aslan in LWW was a little off.
And I think that lack of strict one-to-one correlation is what allows the books to be read as if there is no correlation at all. The parallels are there if you approach the books from a certain point of view, but they vanish or twist if your initial point of view is different.
I do wonder, actually, if the 'variant' characterization of Aslan in LWW might be one reason Lewis eventually said the books should be read in internal chronological order. Because if your first impression of Aslan is from LWW, you're much more likely to miss the Christian underpinnings than if you first meet him creating a world and a garden that has a Tree of Life. *grin* (I still think publication order is best, regardless of what that does to people's view of the religious subtext in the series, because LWW stands alone much better than MN, and is much more likely to lure people into reading further.)
-----
If I were to write in the Northern Lights fandom (and I don't, I petered out after the first book), I would have to take Pullman's consideration when creating that world in mind when writing in it. I couldn't have the faux!Catholic church represent anything other than what Pullman sees as a corrupt church in our own world, despite the fact that I disagree with him vastly. But to do otherwise would be un-canon. I could create a splinter group within the church which worked for good, but I could not change the foundation of it.
I don't blame you for petering out; the first book is by far the most boring of the three. And while Pullman is in some ways more technically skilled than Lewis (there are fewer holes in his world-building and his characters are more rounded), he's much less successful at subordinating his ideology to his story. I can read Narnia as pagan if I want too; Lewis left that space for interpretation in his books. I cannot read His Dark Materials as anything other than an attack on organized religion in general and the Catholic church in particular. And that annoys me, because while I am not Christian, I am religious and an active member of my local Unitarian Universalist congregation, and I dislike it when people focus only on the failings and flaws of organized religion and disregard all its virtues and benefits.
(I do love the ending, though, because Pullman doesn't cheat. He obeys the rules he set up at the beginning, and the resulting bittersweet ache is more attractive to me than any loophole-produced happy ending could be.)