by Derek—2005.08.27 @ 2051

My Rating: 3 out of 5
After reading The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe, I had high expectations for the second Narnia book, Prince Caspian, but it didn't deliver. The book seemed to build up to something big, but half-way through it sort of fizzled out leaving me wanting more. I even came up with my own plot-twisting ending, just to keep things interesting.
The first thing I wanted to clear up is that Prince Caspian is the second book in the Narnia series, yet almost every publisher places it in the No. 4 slot. I prefer the order C.S. Lewis used when he authored the books, placing Prince Caspian second. I think the re-ordering of the books is inconvenient and a hazard. Here is the order as published:
Each book is linked to the others, yet you can pick one up, having no knowledge of the others, and get along fine. There is, however, some continuity to the story line, but it shouldn't have to follow chronologically. In fact, some of the insight gained in later books would be spoiled if you read them first. Here are some points from
The case for reading the books in published order includes the following:
The Lion is presented very much as the first of a series. It concludes with the words 'That is the very end of the adventure of the wardrobe. But if the Professor was right, it was only the beginning of the adventures of Narnia.' The 'second' book, Prince Caspian, is subtitled 'The Return to Narnia.'
The narrator of The Lion says 'None of the children knew who Aslan was, any more than you do.' But if 'you' are supposed to have read The Magician's Nephew, then you do know who Aslan was.
The charm of the opening of The Lion is spoiled if you already know, from Magician's Nephew, that the wardrobe is magical; that the Professor has been to Narnia, and why there is a street lamp in Narnia. Similarly, the 'shock of recognition' in Magician's Nephew is spoiled if you don't know the significance of the wardrobe.
Why should The Horse and His Boy, which happens during the final chapter of The Lion, be set after it? Could an equally valid case not be made for saying that it should be set after The Silver Chair where it is presented as a story-within-a-story?
I, for one, think that the books should be read how they were written and originally published: it leaves some of the exciting suspense and character in the books that would be removed if you knew all the "back story" from the beginning. One of the best tools writers have is starting a story "in the middle" and slowly bringing the reader around throughout. It is often fun to guess and speculate which is what keeps us reading.
As I said before, I thought the ending of Prince Caspian sort of dies off slowly. In fact, I labored through the last few chapters a little disappointed because I was expecting a sort of alternate ending. Soon after we learn of young Prince Caspian, we hear how he was being told stories of "Old Narnia" from his nurse. Once news of these stories--and Caspian's belief in them--was learned by his wicked Uncle, the Nurse is quickly dismissed and later replaced by a wise and shrewed old man. Young Caspian has doubts at first, but soon finds his new teacher better and more fulfilling than the Nurse because the tudor continues the "Old Narnia" stories and elaborates on them.
At first I didn't think much of it, but then I caught myself wondering if the wicked Uncle was laying a plot for the young Caspian prince. Could it be that the Uncle truly hated his nephew and wanted to get rid of him? We find out this is true later on when the Uncle has his own son and heir. If the Uncle found out just how much Young Caspian believed in the stories of Old Narnia, wouldn't he want to use this information against him? Well, that's what I thought when I read how much the old tudor was investing his time telling Narnia stories to the Prince.
I put my bets on the shrewed Uncle. What if he was paying the tudor to tell his nephew more stories of Old Narnia and build up his hopes. Then, at the right moment, the Prince would have to flee for his life (which was true either way). But which way should he go? Well, to the Old Narnians, of course. The people he had grown to love and respect through all the stories he was being fed. Well, we know the Old Narnians are good, but wouldn't this be just what the Uncle wants? Have his nephew--who he wants to destroy anyway--discover the secret hiding places of the remaining Narnians? The Prince would be totally innocent, and hence believed by the Narnians.
The plot twist (I was imagining) was sinister. The Uncle's plan was going perfectly. He instructed the tudor to tell Prince Caspian to lead all the Old Narnians to one specific place for their defense. With his enemies out in the open, the wicked Uncle would have no problem marching in on them and laying waste to the old remnants. I was beginning to think this old tudor was really one bad dude.
In classic Narnians fashion (my daydream continued), Aslan the Lion would stride in to save the day, along with the children, and the tudor would have to do some heavy "repenting" to atone for his mistakes.
Well, I was wrong. The tudor turned out to be as honest and open as a summer daisy, and Mr. Wicked Uncle just sort of disappears from the story line. The Uncle was so forgettable I don't even remember what happened to him.
The only other significant part I remember (I was, as you can see, very disappointed not seeing any plot twists involving the tudor come to pass) was when Aslan finally did return, but no one could see him except Lucy. One-by-one, the other children began to trust and see him to, but only after showing trust and faith in Lucy's guidance.
The story was okay, but Melissa assures me the others are much better (I probably shouldn't expect such elaborate plot twists).
Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)
(If you haven’t left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)