Quote:
Originally Posted by JSWolf
But it's not Mists of Avalon that's at fault. It's the legend of King Arthur. You shuld know this and thus prevent your kids from reading anything about King Arthur until they are ready. Don't even let them watch the Disney movie The Sword and the Stone as they'll just want more and more is not what you want to give them.
|
Mists' big "no-no" is the incest between Morgana and Arthur, which is clearly part of Arthurian legend since the dawn. Sure, if you want a kid to watch the animated SITS, they won't get that bit. But any other version? It's there, no matter how "glossed over." The big
problem with Mists is that it's quite feminist, really.
Quote:
|
That's an issue? It's so innocuous that it's laughable. I know you are entitled to your opinion, but so am I in disagreeing.
|
And it's so glossed-over as to be non-existent, really. Did I like that idea that the Queen riders didn't get a choice of "husbands?" not really. But did it intrigue me? That a woman would choose to put her Weyr first? It was an interesting idea to me, as a youngster. I also read GWTW the summer I was 12, to be 13 that Fall. Did I think that Rhett should have raped his wife? Wait, let me think...
Quote:
|
The Narnia books have way more violence than the Pern books. Also, the Narnia books also have veiled references to the Bible. Aslan is Jesus and it is very obviously so. C.S. Lewis was very religious and it shows in the Narnia series.
|
Oh, YES. Sorry, but Narnia's violence way outpaces Pern, by a massive factor. Pern has no war, and you can't say that about Narnia. Aslan is killed, if you'll recall, and if you think that a youngish reader won't be upset about THAT, you're wrong. His subsequent christ-like resurrection aside, it's violent. So are the wars. Pern? On Pern, they chase Thread, and dragons and riders are injured, by and large. You can't compare the two, for "violence." So, again, it sounds to me like we're talking about SEX as the big bugaboo, in terms of propriety.
And I have no idea how this is pertinent in a discussion about an app that replaces word A with word B. That app wouldn't do scat about the violence in Narnia, or the topic of choice at Pern.
I'd put in a big spiel, here, about
why on earth anyone's religious beliefs were brought into this discussion--after all, sorry, but the other word for "scat" has nothing to do with whether one is Hindu, Buddhist, Muslim, Christian, or Wiccan--but I've decided it's not worth it.
Hitch