Yeah, that's what the film said. I think maybe it was because Aslan wanted them to know Him in this world, but He knew that if they were waiting to return to Narnia, they would never look for Him. I know that if I was waiting to return to Narnia and to Aslan I wouldn't look for Him either in this world. (Of course, I already know His Name in this world. I should, seeing as how it's in my screen name.) That is kind of strange, though, how some grown-ups can stay, and the Pevensies even did during the Golden Age, but then they got too old. I never thought about this too much before I saw this thread. Thanks for helping me think a little bit more. 🙂

I liked the film's version of the "too old" line, though I'd gathered that sort of interpretation from the book anyway.
Very good point, Jaygee!
I think Narnia serves as something of a "school", so to speak, for the children who adventured there: the things they learn there are to be applied to their lives in their own world. I don't know if Lewis noticed it when he wrote things like the "too old" line or Aslan's "another name" line, but it seems (to me, anyway) that it's not just speaking to just those kids, but to the readers too. Something along the lines of, "You - yes, you, reader - you're to do the same. Live the lessons you've learned on this adventure and apply them in your own lives. Narnia is a momentary thing, just as it is for these fictional children, and should point you to the realities of your world. Aslan goes by many names: go and find Him."

Another good point, Ariel. 🙂

Well, a good point, Ariel, but I confess I will not be following it. I already knew the other name before I read the books (as many of you did); in fact, the first time I read LWW as a wee sprout, I knew what was afoot when Aslan came back after his death. I've read the books regularly since then and plan to continue. It's not a substitute for me. And, frankly, I wish Lewis hadn't made the choice to shut the kids out as they got older. That particular element has always bothered me in books. For one thing, as a child it made me reluctant to grow up, as if I would lose my essence somehow. Now that I'm an adult, I realize that (a) my character is not a function of my age, and (b) growing up has its own blessings, and you can continue to savor many of the things you loved as a child. (Some you need to give up. Like those awful fake-flavored chewy candies. All they do is pay for dentists' children's college educations.)

So, being the subversive I am, I often imagine other visits to Narnia for the Friends, or visits to other worlds, or things they can do here in this world. After all, they have all this training.

Please feel free to disregard this opinion. It just seems to work for me. Too old to get to Narnia? I say fie on that.

That's pretty good, Mini. I didn't (and still don't, haha) like growing up myself. Things are so much simpler as a child, for one. 🙂

I did not mean that Narnia is a substitute (far from it!). I guess I should have expanded my thought a little further: Narnia doesn't just point to the Name above all names, but to the lessons that we can apply, both with other people and with God (eg: "I am the Lion").

And look at Digory and Polly. They were aged and they still loved Narnia. And they didn't get the whole schpiel about never going back; they just never did.

Certainly never too old for Narnia, no matter what age. 😀

You were clear, Ariel, don't worry. And you brought up an interesting way of looking at it. I love your idea of Narnia as a school--and I agree that it is one for all of the children who go there and also for its readers. I like your new point about Polly and Digory also.

I look at the Narnia books several ways. One is by taking in and savoring the profound works that Lewis created. Isn't it wonderful how rich and ever-new great books can be?

Another way is by looking at the elements the author uses to create the books, turning them around in my mind, savoring some and being a bit frustrated by others. (The latter reaction is very rare, I hasten to add.) I've noticed that two elements that bother me the most are actually things that Lewis took from more conventional children's stories. One was the ending of LWW, where the story stops rather abruptly with the children coming home to the nursery, as it were, just like any E. Nesbit or Mrs. Molesworth story. If you look at that ending the way Lewis wrote it, there's no emotion at all from the kids--no monumental sense of loss or shock or displacement. It's just neat and tidy. It's as if Lewis wasn't thinking about Narnia at that moment. He was thinking about how one ends a story for children. (He didn't know his own strength!) My theory (and again, please don't feel compelled to agree with me) is that Lewis was still learning his craft as a children's writer at that point, and he felt a certain loyalty to what already existed, instead of realizing the freedom he had as a pathfinding author.

(There is one rather amazing result of this ending that no one, not even Lewis, brought out: because the Four were taken from the Golden Age and sent home, they could be there centuries later to save Narnia once again. Talk about providential!)

The other element that I don't love is the "you're growing up" one. That's a common nineteenth-century sentiment, probably going back to Rousseau, now that I think of it--the glories of childhood as a sacred state. It's a thought that echoes through Peter Pan and even The House at Pooh Corner. Well, of course there's a glory in innocence, but growth is also sacred, because, as is pointed out in First Corinthians 13, you can grow in perception as you age, and you see things you couldn't see before. Whatever Lewis's motivations for using that element, I don't find that it's necessary to the essence of the story. The idea of becoming like little children is important, as we know, but I think that's not a capacity we lose as we age.

And besides, as Jaygee points out, they already were older as Kings and Queens in Narnia.

This is a fascinating question, thanks for bringing it up. I like the various points people have made. For some reason it's never particularly bothered me, and I think I always saw it in the way that I think Lewis (chiefly) intended it - as a plot device: he didn't want to keep writing about the same characters indefinitely. If Susan and Peter hadn't been prevented from returning, we would never have got to see Eustace and later Jill have their own adventures. There's also perhaps the fact that he was writing children's stories with the idea that he wanted children (and perhaps children of a certain age-range) as the main characters and since his characters were getting older, he wanted to "replace" them with younger ones.

Moving from Lewis' intentions so Aslan's, while working on my story about Susan, I started wondering how the conversation had gone that Aslan had with Susan and Peter, and decided to write a one-shot about how it might have transpired. One thing that came to me as I was thinking about it was that these stories are taking place during World War II. While the Pevensie's second adventure in Narnia had brought and end to oppression and a short-lived war in Narnia (the rightful King was on the throne and everyone had seen Aslan and believed in him again(, in our world, things were much darker and needed people who understood the truth to be there to help the world through such a dark period. A quote from my one-shot:

The Lion continued then, explaining why it [their not being allowed to return] must be so. “You children have been called to Narnia, twice now, for two reasons: for the sake of Narnia and for your own sakes. For the Narnians, that you might bring them hope and freedom. And for yourselves, that you might learn to have faith.”

After a short silence, Peter spoke up. “Faith in what, Aslan?”

Aslan looked into his eyes, as though baring into his very soul. “Not in what, son of Adam, faith in whom? You have both served me well in this world. But now you must learn to serve me in yours.”...

“Aslan," [began Susan] "does that mean…”

“I Am. You know, Susan, that I Am. You have always known this. And this is why I need both of you there now more than here. Your world is going through dark days. Some of the worst are yet to come, though a period of relief is not far off. I need men and women, boys and girls, who can stand for me in the days ahead. Narnia has been restored again, and the truth will be made known throughout the land. But in your world there is dire need of people to stand for what is right, just and true. I need you there.”

These are obviously my words, not Lewis' and very possibly not what he had in mind, but I think it works as a potential explanation for their not being allowed to return.

(If you're interested, you can read my full "conversation" here: http://www.hedgepickle.blogspot.co.uk/2012/09/remembering-you.html

Both those ideas are wonderful, Ajjie: (1) that Lewis wanted to write about more characters, and that he wanted to write about characters of that age, and (2) that Narnia was giving them training that was desperately needed in the dark world of wartime Britain. I'd definitely agree with each one.

Your conversation between Susan and Aslan is lovely, and I'll look for the rest of it on your blog. Thanks.

@Mini: Ah, I see what you're getting at now. That makes a lot of sense. 🙂
@Ajjie: Oh, yeah, I remember this! Very good point yourself. 🙂

The great thing about this topic is that each of us is coming up with thought-provoking ideas that don't contradict the ideas of the others but that add to them and flesh out our understanding and enjoyment of the books. I love this thread!

(P.S. Ajjie, if you present your ideas in your university papers the way you do in your comments on TLC, your professors must love your work. You're so articulate and enlightening.)

I've got an idea, and I'm trying to figure out how to say it right. It's not coming well into its words. But basically, I think oldness may not be the same thing as grown-ness or maturity. I don't know if there is anything to support this aside from Susan, but if "old" meant something more like jaded... that they were in danger of losing the ideals which made them Narnian... but that sounds a bit harsh to the others, and doesn't quite make sense for Aslan. It would explain how a Frank and Helen could come in full-grown without being too old, but not how Aslan would let totally un-Narnian persons stumble in through chinks and chasms and such if he was being so hyper-protective of the purity of that world. <.<

Another aspect of what has been discussed is the theme in the Chronicles of the young, small or humble characters being used to accomplish great things or say wise things, like
*Lucy leading the way in LWW and PC and being so spiritually sensitive
*Reepicheep in PC, the ultimate oxymoron: a valiant warrior Mouse
*Trumpkin learning to not write the Pevensies off just because they are children when they meet at Cair Paravel in PC
*Shasta the low class fisher-boy shows surprising and redemptive courage and stamina not only in facing the lion at the Hermit's March but also in going on to warn Archenlanders and Narnians of the Telmarine invasion
*the tiny creatures who minister to King Tirian's thirst and hunger while he is lashed to the tree in LB
*the nameless Lamb in the Last Battle who speaks the Truth in a time of darkness on Stable Hill

Lewis perhaps cycles out older human children from the Chronicles so younger inexperienced ones can respond to the challenges in Narnia with fresh new eyes and be transformed in new ways by their contact with Aslan and Narnia. In their weakness and youth, personal transformation + virtue+ strength + courage shine forth all the brighter.

Wow 🙂 I'm really impressed by the discussion that followed. I really enjoyed reading your insights.

"One was the ending of LWW, where the story stops rather abruptly with the children coming home to the nursery, as it were, just like any E. Nesbit or Mrs. Molesworth story. If you look at that ending the way Lewis wrote it, there's no emotion at all from the kids--no monumental sense of loss or shock or displacement."

On this point Mini, I think I understand what you mean, but I actually like it. Partly I like the trope of 'no matter what wild adventures you go on you always end up safe at home in the end', and partly I have my own explanation for the lack of emotion that satisfies me. It also helps me explain the other conundrum at the end of LWW, that of their only remembering England faintly like a dream. It seems to me that at least in this case the world travel was to them like waking from a dream.. where the world they are not in feels distant. It seems to me like they weren't strongly attached to whichever world they weren't in, which was a blessing to them really.

It's interesting the way we all manage to process the odd parts of the stories (for want of a better word) in a way that satisfies us. It's one of the ways Narnia is so wonderful: it's almost flexible, as if it's custom-made for each one of us. Another simile just struck me: it's like that medicine of Mary Poppins', which is a different flavor for everyone who takes a spoonful. (That moment is in both the book and the wonderful movie.) For myself, I've always imagined that Aslan prepared the Four for their return to England. Lewis just didn't write about it. As for the "too old to come back," that's one of the things that The Last Battle resolves and even rectifies. There's a Country that none of us is ever too old, too worn, or too broken for. Our passports are already stamped.