You can read my reviews of The Magician’s Nephew and The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe, too.

I first “read” the Narnia series as a kid in the family minivan listening to radio drama versions. All I really remember from the series is the Wood Between the Worlds, Lucy meeting Tumnus, Eustace as a dragon, and the train crash.

I definitely didn’t remember the super racist talking horse and 14-year-old.

Wow… yeah, that’s racist

The third book in the Chronicles of Narnia, The Horse and His Boy, is the least connected to the rest of the series. That’s probably a good thing, in my book anyway, because daaaaang is it racist.

We’re off to a very rocky start with the dark, nasty, mean turban-wearers and the pale hero, clearly so much better than all the Arabian Calormene people around him.

There’s a lot of hitting and slavery and sniveling and selfishness, all committed by characters that, though they be fictional, are just as obviously Arabian as cheap Halloween costumes are knock-off Disney characters. As Wikipedia neatly summarizes: “Calormenes live south of a desert, wear turbans and pointed shoes, their noblemen are called Tarkaans (similar to the medieval Central Asian title tarkhan), they are armed with scimitars, and their money is called ‘crescents’.”

The main character, Shasta, and the talking horse he teams up with, Bree, both repeat and drive in this messaging with their repetitive bad-mouthing of the country and its people. Calormen is Bad and Narnia is Good and this constant messaging really slaps you in the face.

I AM NOT SAYING LEWIS WAS A BAD MAN

Before Narnia lovers and book purists lunge for me, take a second to recognize that I am not saying Lewis was a bad man or a bad writer.

Was this book racist? Yes. Absolutely. Was Lewis racist? At the time he wrote this, at least, I’d say definitely undeniably yes. Was he a bad person? Should the entire series be written off? Are Lewis and Narnia cancelled? Not exactly.

It’s important when reading historical, classic, and otherwise aged material to consider the context of the work’s writing and publication dates. (It’s equally important to consider geographical and cultural context, by the way.) I’m not a historian and don’t feel like doing a deep dive on this light re-reading of some kids’ books, but I know 1940s England didn’t look with quite as much empathy or sensitivity to other cultures as 2020 America (or England) does.

However, as modern readers, it is also necessary to look with a critical eye and call out messages that are not appropriate or acceptable today — including Lewis’ racism in the Chronicles of Narnia. I would say this is especially important when we’re dealing with children’s literature, stories given to developing young minds that influence who they become and the way they think and see the world.

Kids should be allowed to read this book, don’t get me wrong. But they should also discuss and be made aware of the harmful messages and stereotypes this book perpetuates and why that’s not okay.

I’ve heard that Lewis’ portrayal/understanding of both race and gender changed as he got older — because humans are allowed to learn and become better over time, remember? — so I’m hopeful any other non-Narnian countries and characters in the rest of the series might be a little more… nuanced.

Anyway… with that out of the way, on to the actual story

The story is fun. The plot has that classic Narnian adventure feel, with a young relatable hero and some unpredictable twists (the lion chase with the girl getting scratched; Shasta having to run ahead alone to save the country).

Shasta’s secret twin and heritage are suuuuper obvious. I’m not saying that seeing the ending coming is always a bad thing. But Lewis made this “twist” so obvious that I got annoyed Shasta never even suspected the truth. I mean, you’re a teenager, you know you’re adopted, and you meet this kid who looks so identical to you that his closest friends assume you’re him and never realize their mistake. You don’t once pause to think “hey maybe we’re related? maybe they know my real parents? maybe we might possibly share some genes somewhere in the family tree?”

Seeing the Pevensies and Narnians from an outsider’s perspective was really fun. I liked that scene.

Lucy going into battle, and the prince disobeying his dad and dragging his new brother into battle, were both really unexpected from this uber-Christian allegorical sometimes-maybe-sexist writer. I liked seeing Lucy as an adult queen holding her own and charging into the fray. I didn’t really understand why the twins joined the fight from a narrative perspective, but whatever, it all turned out okay.

Aravis: girls, love interests, model minorities

By herself, out of context, I really love Aravis. She’s fun. She’s cool. She rides horses and cooks up clever schemes.

With Aravis, Lucy, and that air-headed princess Aravis is friends with, this book almost passes the sexism test. We have varied depictions of multiple named female characters integral to the story whose conversation goes beyond just the men in their lives. But… the air-headed princess is a good example of Lewis’ issue with women/girls who are into “girly” or feminine things — she is not a likable or helpful character, and she is the one who likes nice fabrics and perfumes and thinks marriage is a good idea. I appreciate that we have multiple female characters and they’re not all good, but making the one unlikable female unlikable because she is the most feminine is… uncomfortable.

The initial animosity between Aravis and Shasta feels a little pointless and unfounded. Does she hate him because they’re different races? Because “girls rule and boys drool”? Because she doesn’t like people in general? I think it’s supposed to be a case of silly childhood gender spats, and it kinda becomes an enemies-to-friends(-to-lovers) relationship, which is a popular trope. I just thought it felt unfounded.

Why did Aravis and Shasta get married though? What was the point of that? It felt like a “we’ve got a hero and this cool girl he went through the story with so we gotta give them the happily ever after Disney treatment” situation. They’re not a bad match — both strong-willed, well-developed characters — but nowhere did we get any indication they had feelings for each other.

Anyway, the complicated thing about Aravis’ character is that she’s basically a “token minority” or “model minority.” (Yes, we’re going back to the race thing.)

Aravis is Calormene, but undeniably a good, likable, positive character. She seems to be held up as the “see, Lewis/Narnia isn’t racist!” main argument (at least for this one book). Except making one non-white character a good guy, by disavowing her entire culture and running away with the white dude to live in his white country, doesn’t erase the racism at all. It basically uses an individual example of colonialist influence to reinforce that original racist, anti-Arabian-culture narrative. She’s ‘not like the other Carlomenes’ and therefore, by being not like the nonwhite culture, worthy of equality with the whites.

This whole book was just uncomfortable.

Oh yeah, and there was a horse

I should probably talk about the horses, considering the title of the book and everything.

First: Bree is Savage. Like, wow. I think some people read him as “sassy” but maybe I was already too on edge with the racism, because I just read him as “mean.” He is called out for his pride a few times toward the end, so that made me feel better.

Then we’ve got the girl horse. Hwin is so shy and quiet I kept forgetting she was around. I wish she’d been written a little better, or differently, anyway. Her characterization did feel a little sexist, honestly. If there were more female talking horses to compare her to, I’d feel better knowing it was a specific-character thing and not a female-horse-in-general thing. As it was, she might as well have not even been around.

Yay, we’re done

Thank goodness that’s over with. This entire experience was uncomfortable.

Other good posts discussing the racism of The Horse and His Boy: On Bustle; on Chron.

On to book four!