Douglas 1

Tiffani Douglas

COMM 290A

Dr. Jennifer Scott

15 December 2009

Film Adaptation in the Context of Art as Emotion:

The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe

Throughout human history, art has been expressed in a variety of forms. One of these

forms—literature—has the power to evoke great emotion in readers and broaden the imaginative

horizons of mankind. C. S. Lewis’ fantasy series, The Chronicles of Narnia, overwhelms readers

with the wonder of another world. The books amassed such great acclaim that filmmaker

Andrew Adamson decided to direct a film adaptation of Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe, the

first of Lewis’ adored books. The aesthetic choices Adamson made when he adapted The Lion,

the Witch, and the Wardrobe into a film resulted in the loss of several layers of Lewis’ rich depth

of emotion.

The aesthetic principle of adaptation is seen frequently throughout works of art. In

addition to literature, drama has often been adapted into a film rendition. Architecture has been

adapted to photography. Literature has also been adapted to music—many Psalms in the Bible

have been transformed into lyrics for hymns. In his book, Adaptations as Imitations: Films from

Novels, James Griffith explores the opinions of various film theorists as they attempt to unravel

the changes that take place when a work of literature is adapted into a film. One such theorist,

Jean Mitry, attempts to unravel the nuances of adaptation by defining it as “a matter of passing

from one form to another, a matter of transposition, of reconstruction” (qtd. in Griffith 25). For

Douglas 2

Mitry, adaptation is the process art goes through when it is transcribed from one medium to

another.

Before the principle of adaptation in the literature and film versions of The Lion, the

Witch, and the Wardrobe can be explored further, another issue must be addressed; can film be

considered art? Leo Tolstoy, a Russian philosopher and author of the book What is Art, sought to

define art within the scope of emotion. Tolstoy asserted, “art is that human activity which

consists in one man’s consciously conveying to others, by certain external signs, the feelings he

has experienced, and in others being infected by those feelings and also experiencing them” (40).

The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe conveys the emotions of Lewis to his readers throughout

several instances in his writing, and so it is clearly a work of art. Yet the question remains if the

film achieves this same standard.

Because film is such a radically different medium than literature, it evokes emotion in a

different way. Instead of one man sitting behind a desk depicting his own emotion through the

description of characters’ feelings, The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe film visually

translates the emotion of the director onto a screen. Dudley Andrew, a film theorist, states that

“in a strong sense, adaptation is the appropriation of a meaning from a prior text” (Griffith 73).

When he directed The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe, Adamson showcased his personal

interpretation of the feelings Lewis evoked in him as he read the book. Therefore, the film

satisfactorily fits with Tolstoy’s definition of art.

The infection of emotion in The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe the book is very

apparent. One of the first strong instances of this occurs when Edmund returns from his first

excursion into Narnia. Edmund’s vain attitude is expressed as a feeling of sullenness when he

encounters Lucy and must admit that Narnia exists. This emotion snowballs to a climax when

Douglas 3

Edmund succumbs to his bitterness, and he “decided all at once to do the meanest and most

spiteful thing he could think of” (Lewis 44). In the book, Lewis chooses to state explicitly how

cruel Edmund’s act is, and this causes the reader to be more sympathetic of Lucy’s plight when

Peter and Susan do not believe her story. The scene does more than reveal Edmund’s pettiness;

Lewis gives the reader fresh insight into man’s fallen nature. Edmund would rather defend his

own pride at the expense of his sister than admit that Lucy’s world is real.

This idea is muted in the film. Although Adamson does follow the events as they happen

in the book, the viewer is quicker to dismiss Edmund’s betrayal of Lucy in the film than in the

book because the scene switches so quickly to addressing Peter

and Susan’s confusion about Lucy’s “lie”. In the book, Lewis’

writing punctuates Edmund’s choices with overt references to

Edmund’s selfish desire to appear mature to Peter and Susan. In

the film, Edmund writes Lucy off as a child who “doesn’t know

when to stop pretending” (The Lion, the Witch, and the

Wardrobe). The film cannot do this scene justice, because the viewer’s sense of Edmund’s spite

does not run as deep. Edmund’s expression on the right is the closest he comes to visually

portraying the same spiteful emotions Edmund feels in the book, and yet he still does not do

Lewis’ powerful words justice. Furthermore, Adamson chooses to soften the sting of Edmund’s

betrayal of Lucy by justifying it. Right from the very beginning of the film, it is subtly

referenced that Edmund’s sullen and belligerent attitude is the result of the Pevensie children’s

father being away to war.

Arguably, the most important character in The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe is

Aslan, and he proved to be another disappointment. In the film, Aslan admits, “There is a deep

Figure 1: Edmund's spiteful betrayal of Lucy (The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe)

Douglas 4

magic, more powerful than any of us, that rules over all of Narnia. It defines right from wrong

and governs all our destinies—yours…and mine” (The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe). This

implies that Aslan is not much more than an instrument submissive to the greater powers of

Narnia, deviating from Lewis’ portrayal of Aslan and his authority.

The magazine Christianity Today published a review of the film which provides severe

criticism of the film version of Aslan. The author of the review, Jeffrey Overstreet, laments that

“scene by scene, the writers consistently skirt the issue of Aslan’s authority, eliminating most

references to his history, power, and influence” (3). The powerful authority that Aslan holds as

Narnia’s version of Christ was lost when the literature was adapted into a film.

Because Lewis’ own feelings thoroughly permeate the book, readers obtain a clear sense

of his religious sensibilities. One of the most powerful examples of Lewis’ emotions regarding

the great Lion in the book is shown in the despair felt by Lucy and Susan upon the death of

Aslan:

I hope no one who reads this book has been quite as miserable as Susan and Lucy were

that night; but if you have been—if you’ve been up all night and cried till you have no

more tears left in you—you will know that there comes a sort of quietness. You feel as if

nothing was ever going to happen again. At any rate that was how it felt to these two.

Hours and hours seemed to go by in this dead calm, and they hardly noticed that they

were getting colder and colder. (Lewis 158)

This description is particularly relevant because Lewis portrays Aslan as the Narnian version of

Jesus. Through the despair of the two girls, Lewis is writing a tribute to the sacrifice of Jesus on

the cross and revealing his own deep emotions about the issue. Readers can connect with Lewis

because of the depth of loss he feels at Christ’s sacrifice, and this is the essence of art.

Douglas 5

The strength of these feelings eludes the film adaptation. One of theorists discussed in

Griffith’s book, Edward Murray, avidly expresses the importance of capturing an author’s views

as he portrays them in writing. In the case of The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe, Lewis

presents Adamson with the challenge of capturing the emotion of despair as Aslan’s life is cut

short. Murray states that “the director must be able to translate the novelist’s verbal value system

—his tone or stance—into a visual theme if he is to capture the novel. Theme expresses the

artist’s view of the nature of existence” (qtd. in Griffith 27). While the grief of the Pevensie

sisters is clearly displayed, the film lacked the overwhelming sense of desolation that consumes

the two girls in the book.

Their sorrow is cut short by the urgency of the looming battle. Susan, ever sensible,

comes to the conclusion that they must return to their brothers and give news of what has

happened. Adamson makes the aesthetic choice to create a montage by cutting between scenes of

Aslan’s resurrection and the scenes depicting Peter and Edmund’s preparation for and

engagement in battle.

The montage effectively negates the tragedy of Aslan’s death as an intrinsic loss. In the

book, readers despair with Lucy and Susan because they have lost a dear companion and

benevolent king. Because of the montage in the film, viewers get the sense that Aslan’s death is

most significant because of the imminent battle. The film focuses on the peril of Peter’s situation

as he goes to war without Aslan to guide him. In the novel, Aslan’s resurrection is the emotional

climax of the story—the film reduces it to a mere sidebar to the main action of the Narnians’

battle.

One of the underlying themes of Lewis’ book is the inevitable triumph of good over evil.

In the novel form of The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe, Lewis provides the reader with a

Douglas 6

basic but indisputable understanding of the distribution of power between Aslan and the witch.

Mr. Beaver tells the Pevensie children, “if she [the Witch] can stand on her two feet and look

him [Aslan] in the face it'll be the most she can do and more than I expect of her” (Lewis 79).

According to the creatures of Narnia, the Witch holds very little power when she is compared to

the might of Aslan.

Indeed, when the Witch confronts Aslan to demand possession of Edmund, Lewis gives

the readers a taste of Aslan’s absolute power over her, for “the Witch, staring for a moment with

her lips wide apart, picked up her skirts and fairly ran for her life” when Aslan roared at her

(Lewis 144). Lewis is clearly expressing the emotion of triumph in Aslan during this scene, and

the reader is left feeling jubilant that Aslan has driven the Witch away.

Yet Lewis has an ulterior motive for referencing this example of emotion in Aslan. He is

clearly adhering to the Biblical principle that the nature of good and evil is never balanced; God

has always triumphed over Satan in our world, and Aslan has done no less in Lewis’ rendition of

the land of Narnia. Lewis is remaining consistent in his use of allegory while allowing the reader

to tap into his exultant feelings concerning Christ’s dominion over evil.

Adamson thoroughly overlooks this important theme, and in doing so, he makes another

fatal choice concerning Aslan. In Adaptations as Imitations,

Griffith states emphatically “divergence from any novel…would be

damaging…if the change dilutes or destroys a necessary or valuable

effect” (73). Not only does the film reduce Aslan’s majesty, it

effectively overdramatizes the power of the Witch. Far from fleeing

in panic at the sound of Aslan’s presumably terrifying roar, the

Witch does not even flinch. The screenshot to the left displays the Figure 2: The Witch's reaction to Aslan's roar (The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe)

Douglas 7

Witch’s reaction just after Aslan’s intimidating roar. Although there is a trace of fear in her face,

the Witch hardly broke eye contact with Aslan during the entire duration of the scene.

By portraying the White Witch essentially as no less than the evil counterpart of Aslan,

Adamson interferes with the allegory Lewis set up in his book to convey the unchallengeable

power of Aslan and detracts from the book one of its most important elements. As Overstreet

stated in Christianity Today’s film review, “Aslan is essentially muzzled and bound long before

the Stone Table scene” (3). As rendered in the film, Aslan is a far cry from capable of evoking

the feeling of triumph and authority that Lewis so skillfully attributed to him, and the Witch’s

power is elevated to equal the authority of Aslan.

Although less significant than the aforementioned problems of the film adaptation of The

Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe, the montage scene as Peter and the Narnians battle the White

Witch and the Pevensie girls see Aslan resurrected presents another issue. According the

Christianity Today film review, Adamson dedicates “20 minutes of elaborate, Jackson-esque,

CGI warfare” to the battle scene (Overstreet 2). The review goes on to say that Adamson

included such a long battle scene in order to ensure that a video game could be created based on

the film.

Adamson contrasts these attention-grabbing, intense scenes with the much calmer scenes

in which Lucy and Susan witness Aslan’s resurrection. This effectively builds dramatic effect

during Peter’s battle scenes, and the viewer is left breathless with anticipation when the film

switches from the battle to Susan and Lucy’s story thread. The film evokes the emotion of

excitement in the reader that Lewis never intended for the battle scene in his literature.

Lewis’ portrayal of the story’s ending was very different. Instead of long, gory battle

scenes, Lewis seems to find more enjoyment in depicting the beauty of Narnia as the White

Douglas 8

Witch’s winter thaws. Christianity Today’s film review of The Lion, the Witch, and the

Wardrobe laments that “conventional adventure spectacle replaces the joys of long, memorable

sequences like the melting of the witch's dominion” (Overstreet 2). In fact, Lewis spends two

delightful pages relating the thawing of Narnia and the children’s reactions to it—a great length

when considering the length and conciseness of the entire novel.

The Narnians’ battle, which is so significant in the film, takes up less than a page in

Lewis’ rendition of the story. The necessity of film to conform to the needs of the masses

restricted Adamson’s artistic liberties when adapting the book to film. This resulted in the loss of

a scene from the book that could have captured the essence of the emotion Lewis was trying to

portray as Narnia was reborn. This is one of several problems that arises when literature is

adapted to the big screen.

Nonetheless, the montage scene does make an aesthetic contribution. Bela Balazs, a

theorist discussed in Adaptations as Imitations, holds that “montage gives meaning to the film,

[and] editing causes audience ‘identification’ with the image and allows for the subtler

‘microdrama’ of realism” (Griffith 19). In The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe, the viewer

identifies with the urgency and suspense of Peter’s situation as he confronts the Witch. This

effect is lost in the literature because it is harder to identify with Peter in words than in film.

Despite its numerous letdowns, the film did include several memorable moments that

captured scenes from The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe book in a new light. Although he is

critical of them, Griffith also defends film adaptions when they are created by particularly

talented filmmakers who are attuned to the emotions expressed in the literature they are adapting

their film from. Griffith reminds readers that “even a good novel, adapted by a perceptive and

Douglas 9

imaginative filmmaker, may yield further or different pleasures the novelist did not consider”

(74). There are several instances of this in The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe film.

The greatest of these achievements occurs when Lucy enters Narnia for the first time. In

the book, Lucy “felt a little frightened, but she felt very inquisitive and excited as well” (Lewis

8). She arrives in Narnia at nighttime in the book, so Lewis provides little description of the

scenery. Instead, he forges ahead to describe Lucy’s sighting of the lamp-post and her meeting

with Mr. Tumnus. Caught up in the curiosity Tumnus presents to Lucy as she sees a faun for the

first time, the reader cannot adequately grasp the childlike wonder of discovering a magical land

within a wardrobe.

The film, however, captures this emotion beautifully, and Lucy’s wonder at discovering

Narnia is magnified. Instead of entering Narnia during the night, Lucy finds herself confronted

with the brightness of Narnian daytime the moment she steps

out of the wardrobe. The pure delight of discovering Narnia is

captured brilliantly in the film. Lucy’s expression—displayed on

the right in a screenshot—is filled with bewilderment, joy, and

awe all at the same time. The visual imagery of Lucy’s reaction to

the winter woodland and the scenery of the woodland itself

combine to form a powerful scene. The viewer is immediately

caught up with this experience in a way Lewis was unable to relate in words. Adamson

establishes viewer appreciation for Narnia and endears the viewer to Lucy and her innocent

wonder all in one small sequence. The scene enriches the story Lewis writes and evokes the

emotions essential for viewing The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe film as a work of art.

Figure 3: Lucy's wonder upon discovering Narnia (The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe)

Douglas 10

Whether intentional or not, when literature is adapted into film, key emotions in literature

will always slip through the cracks. Often this is because film is incapable of taping into a

character’s mental processes as they experience emotion. Other times it is because the

filmmaker’s interpretation of emotion in the literature is different from what the writer intended.

Despite the technical or interpretive issues that led to these omissions in The Chronicles of

Narnia, the film is still a praiseworthy effort at recreating the magical story Lewis expressed in

writing.

George Bluestone, a critic quoted often in Griffith’s Adaptations as Imitations,

sympathizes with the filmmaker’s plight when he or she is presented with the challenge of

adapting a book into a film. Bluestone states that “mutations are probable the moment one goes

from a given set of fluid, but relatively homogenous, conventions to another; that changes are

inevitable the moment one abandons the linguistic for the visual medium” (qtd. in Griffith 21).

When critiquing a film that has been adapted from a work of literature, it is important to

remember that the two mediums are drastically different, and elements of the literature will

always be lost in the adaptation. With this in mind, The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe film

did a commendable job expressing the emotions of Lewis’ book as well as film can.

Douglas 11

Works Cited

Griffith, James. Adapations as Imitations: Films from Novels. New Jersey: Associated Press,

Inc., 1997.

Lewis, C.S. The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe. New York:

Scholastic, Inc., 1995.

The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe. Dir. Andrew Adamson. Perf. Georgie Henley, Skandar

Keynes. Walt Disney, 2005. DVD.

Overstreet, Jeffrey. The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe.

Christianity Today, 2009. Dec. 09. Web. 11 Dec. 09.

<http://www.christianitytoday.com>.

Tolstoy, Leo. What is Art?. New York: The Penguin Group, 2005.