Islam Re-Revisited

Another Friday the 13^th.  I hate the films.  And it’s rarely bad luck.  Here’s something completely different.

Obviously Islam is a relevant topic these days.   I can’t turn on the Book of Faces without seeing someone bark and bray about “banning Sharia” or “Muslims taking over America”.  I have a few things to say on this topic, which might be rather provocative.  Bear with me.

Misguided Satanists.   As we know, Islam is the religion founded by Arabian warlord Mohammad in the early 600s.  He claimed Allah told him a bunch of stuff, most (if not all) of which was fairly self-serving.  The most accurate description of this religion is that it was made up by him to justify his military campaigns to take over as much of the known world as he could.  His followers carried on the tradition after his death in 632 and continue worshipping Allah and attempting to spread his Word even to this day.   There are several predominantly Muslim countries, and one (Shi’ite) theocracy, Iran.  The Sunnis of Iraq and Syria have attempted to set up a competing Sunni theocracy in those countries.

C.S. Lewis.  In his The Lion, The Witch, and the Wardrobe series of books, Lewis created a fictional race of Calormenes, who worship a deity named Tash.  These were obviously meant to be Muslims worshipping Allah.  Aslan, the wise and benevolent talking Lion, tells the children that Tash is essentially the Devil.  “Good deeds done in Tash’s name are in fact done in my name, and evil deeds done in my name are actually done in Tash’s name”.  Even Lewis, having identified Allah as Satan, still recognized that there were good Muslims and evil Christians. 

If you don’t believe God or Satan exist, then “Allah” is an imaginary being created by Mohammed to justify his exploits.   Neither option – Satan or make-believe deity – reflects well on Islam.

Reformed Church of Satan.   It’s too difficult for me to conceive that Muslims around the world consciously worship the Devil.  Naturally they view Allah as God.  And Islam has a Devil, Iblis, in their theology.  I’ve yet to hear of any sect of Islam that worships Iblis, as the Devil.

            In the US, we have self-professed Satanists.   In particular, I’m familiar with Anton LaVey, his Church of Satan, and his Satanic Bible, which I own and have read.  Oddly, despite ostensibly worshipping the Devil himself, these “Satanists” are really atheists.  Their brand of Satanism is more accurately described as a deliberately provocative form of atheism which personifies Man and his right to carnal and physical pleasure while he lives his short and brutal life on this planet, followed by eternal oblivion.   LaVey’s positions were extremely close to Ayn Rand’s, and we know she was an atheist too, although I’m not aware of any actual connection between the two.  Rand would have considered LaVey as an arrogant huckster who elevated atheism into a circus sideshow to gain popularity and notoriety for himself.

…so what?   Having said that, I don’t believe Muslims in the United States are any threat to us.  Here is why.

Rome.   This is the capital of world Catholicism.  Rather, I should say, the Vatican City, which has a population of ….557.   Rome itself has a population of 4 million.  There are 1.2 billion Catholics around the world.  The largest Catholic country is Brazil, with 124 million Catholics.   Clearly, 1.2 billion cannot fit in the Vatican, nor in Rome, or even Italy.  I visited Roma and the Vatican myself in 1981 on a school trip, but have no desire to live there.  Nor, it seems, do the Catholics living outside Rome. 

Israel.  There are 14 million Jews worldwide, of which 83% live in Israel and the US.  Zionism aside, not all Jews want to live in Israel.   Half the world’s Jews live in Israel, most of the other half in the US.

Mecca.  Islam’s holy city has a permanent population of 1.6 million.  While all Muslims have a duty to make a lifetime pilgrimage to Mecca, living there permanently appears to be neither required nor expected.   Worldwide there are 1.7 billion Muslims.

Muslims in the US.  Less than 1% of the US population is Muslim.  There are far more Buddhists and atheists – plus Jews, of course – than there are Muslims.  The US is almost 80% Christian.  Of a population of 321 million, that means 256 million Christians and 3 million Muslims.  By numbers alone, it would be almost impossible for Muslims to establish a majority in this country.  And I don’t even think they want to do this.  Why?

Someone posted an infographic on how the world’s Muslim countries are the poorest, shittiest, countries.  Maybe true for Bangladesh, less so for Turkey or Saudi Arabia.  Iraq and Syria are unlikely to get better any time soon.  Egypt isn’t too bad.  Libya is having problems.  Anyhow.

Islam has different varieties:  at the very least there is Sh’ite vs. Sunni, and even the Sunnis have different sects.  If you live in Iran, you have to be Shi’ite.  Presumably living in ISIS controlled territory you have to be Sunni.  When Muslims get uptight about their religion, they are particularly harsh on fellow Muslims who don’t worship Allah quite the same way. 

We take our religious freedom in the US for granted.  We don’t have to worry that our church will blow up, that strangers will accost us on the street and threaten us if we don’t convert to Mormonism, or receive thinly veiled anonymous threats of violence.  Christians in Egypt come to the US to escape persecution, and Muslims come to the US for similar reasons.  (Also, to leave places where suicide bombers and rocket attacks, or all-out war, are a daily risk.)

Again, here in the US, which is less than 1% Muslim?  No one gives a damn.  If Abdul wants to get a bacon cheeseburger at McDonald’s or Burger King, or drink alcohol, or do any of the things which Islam declares “haram” (forbidden), who will stop him?  Who will even care?  Abdul and his family are free to do as they please, without being harassed by the locals about how they practice Islam.  They get to enjoy the benefits of living in a huge, rich country with no Civil War (since 1865), no suicide bombings, no Sharia, no Imams, none of the hassles Muslims have to deal with in Muslim countries.  And most likely they came here for THAT REASON.  So turning the US into a Muslim country is not only impossible, it’s highly undesirable – it defeats the purpose of why they came here, which is not to turn the US into another screwed up Muslim country, but to live somewhere that isn’t a screwed up Muslim country. 

Suicide bombers.   Ok, take away the risk of an outright takeover.  Muslim suicide bombers could still cause problems, right?  Not really. 

            Aside from 9/11, we haven’t seen any suicide bombings in the US.  That Muslim guy in Texas – the Army guy who went BSI – didn’t even blow himself up, nor did the idiots who tried to blow up the World Trade Center back in 1993.  It looks like the shooting spree yahoos who do shoot themselves at the end were all non-Muslims.  The guy at Initech with the unpronounceable name isn’t blowing himself up.  And I don’t see Arab oil sheiks who already have harems of 72 women on this worldly planet blowing themselves up.  Mostly it’s loser virgin boys from Loserstan who do that.  Muslims in the US know they’re well off.  They have too much to lose.  Not gonna happen. 

9/11 & ISIS.   The attack on 9/11 was definitely a bad one.  19 Saudis learned to fly jumbo jets and took down the World Trade Center, knocked a hole in the Pentagon (now fixed), and messed up the Pennsylvania countryside – plus all the crew and passengers on all 4 flights and many firemen and first responders on the ground.  To date, ISIS remains dominant in much of northwest Iraq and northeast Syria.  The Taliban looks like it’s taking back much lost ground in Afghanistan.  The crazies are definitely NOT done yet.  However, those theaters are on the other side of the world from us and no threat to the continental US.

            Closer to home, and more relevant to our concerns here, among all those “peaceful” Muslims coming to the US, who knows how many are truly peaceful and how many are Al Qaeda sleeper cells?  It might be arrogant to assume that 100% of them succumb to the charms of American society.  The FBI needs to remain vigilant at home (while respecting our Constitutional rights, a balance we can acknowledge is not always easy or obvious to make), and the cowboys from Langley better be on top of their game overseas.  Aside from the yahoo in Fort Hood, Texas, and the Boston bombings, all of our mass shootings since 9/11 have been home grown nutjobs with non-Islamic agendas.  But that doesn’t mean there’s not another cell of the same caliber as the 19 from 9/11 cooking up a scheme to do something bad.  However, we’ve seen those to be few and far between.  We have far more to worry about in our daily lives from the mundane dangers of cancer, highway accidents, or random, good old American street crime, to make it sensible to worry about the extremely remote odds of another terrorist attack from Muslims.  They are, in fact, the least of our worries. 

So if you’re obsessed about Muslims invading from Mexico or another 9/11…get a massive clue and CHILL OUT.  They may be Satanists but they’re really no threat to us.  

Islam Revisited

Quite some time ago I posted a blog, “Boom-Boom for Boom-Boom”, in which I argued that the Muslim suicide bombers were actually simply selfish:  killing innocents so they could go to Heaven and get their 72 virgins.   Recently I read a book called The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam and the Crusades, by Robert Spencer.  Like most of these “PIG” books, it takes a fairly strong viewpoint which is 180 degrees opposite what the Blue State people would have us believe, although it explains quite conveniently why some Muslims behave the way they do in much of the Middle East.

 First question, though.  If there is a God, surely there must be a Devil.  We’ll call him Satan.  From Abraham all the way up to John the Baptist, and then Jesus, God had sent a series of prophets down to Earth to tell us what He wanted us to do.  The biggie was Moses and his 10^th Commandments. 

 Where are Satan’s prophets?  Why didn’t he send anyone?  And does he, or did he, have a son (or daughter) to send down to us?  How would we know?  Would Satan’s prophet admit being from Satan?  Or would he claim to be from God?

 The reason this question comes up is because of the nature of the Koran, of Islam, and of Muhammed.  I was stunned to read Dante’s Inferno and see that Dante put Muhammed in Hell, as a fraud.  Presumably what he meant was that Muhammed claimed to be from God and led millions of people astray, away from God’s path.

C. S. Lewis, in The Last Battle (as the title indicates, it’s the last book in the Lion, Witch & Wardrobe series) suggests that the “God” of the Muslims, Tash, i.e. Allah, is really Satan.

For his part, Spencer brings up a number of important points, although he falls well short of Lewis’ conclusion.

1.   For all this talk of the Crusades, what apologists for angry Muslims leave out is that the Muslims invaded Christian Europe centuries before the Crusades, expressly to conquer and convert – or kill – the Christians.  I recall back in Paris we learned about Charles Martel, the French warrior who defeated the Muslims at the Battle of Tours in 732 and sent them reeling back into Spain.  Moreover, the Crusades were a reaction to Muslims restricting access of Christians to Jerusalem and ambushing pilgrim caravans.  If US current foreign policy is a resurgence of the medieval Crusades, why do we form alliances with Muslim countries - including Saudi Arabia, which has implemented much of the Sharia in its own law?  Why didn’t we ban Islam from Iraq after defeating Saddam Hussein or from Afghanistan after defeating the Taliban?  Why is Turkey in NATO?   The simple answer is that the Crusades are a useful rallying cry to elicit anger among Muslims against the Western, Christian countries, but it has absolutely nothing to do with current US or NATO foreign policy towards the Middle East. 

 2.  The earlier portions of Koran which are more tolerant and lenient date from when Muhammed was in Mecca, which at that time was pagan and very unsympathetic to his views.  The later, more violent sections – which Muslim clerics consistently agree supersede the earlier sections – date from when Muhammed was in Medina, where he found a more cooperative crowd.  Whereas the Bible is the opposite: the Old Testament is the heavy-duty, violent part – e.g. Sodom & Gomorrah blasted out of existence, flood eradicates all but Noah and his family on the Ark, David leads armies against Philistines – and the New Testament gives us mellow, laid-back, tolerant Jesus.  Jesus was cool (“Peace be with you.”), Muhammed was extremely violent and intolerant (“join us or DIE!”).   Not only was Jesus a pacifist, if you read Ben-Hur (the 1959 movie doesn’t talk about this) you’ll understand that many of his followers hoped that Jesus would raise an army and throw the Romans out.  They were disappointed when he preached peace and allowed himself to be crucified.  He died for our sins.  Contrast that with Muhammed, who was essentially a warlord and general – a very successful one.  Granted, there are, and have been, bloodthirsty Christians invoking Jesus’ name to justify their atrocities, and there are peaceful, tolerant Muslims.  Even Dante recognized “virtuous pagans.”  But Jesus preached peace and love, Muhammed preached war and death.

 3.   According to the Koran, Muslims are not to make friends with “infidels” (nonbelievers), they can lie and kill them with impunity, and only three “fates” are open to unbelievers:  convert, pay tribute, or die.  We go from Jesus, who was extremely tolerant and pacifist, to “kill the nonbelievers.”  Practically everything in the Koran carries the death penalty, and anything goes so long as it advances the cause of Islam. 

            Spencer’s point is that the craziest, nastiest, most murderous behavior we see from Muslims in the world today is not an aberration but actually condoned and encouraged by the Koran and the Hadith (adjunct interpretations).  Suicide bombers are not defying, corrupting or perverting Islam, rather they are following its instructions, whereas the peaceful Muslims here at home are ignoring their marching orders from Muhammed and are not “true Muslims.”  But the world is full of Catholics (myself included) who don’t exactly obey all the Pope’s commands.  Most Americans claim to believe in God, but only a fraction of them actually go to church or actively follow any specific denomination.  The irony of Muslims pushing for Sharia in non-Muslim countries (e.g. Western Europe) is that you can probably find a very substantial number of Iranians – devout Shi’ite Muslims, no less - who would rather see an end to the theocracy in their country.  Again, Turkey gives us the example of a Muslim democracy which, while far from perfect, is also far from Iran (at least in nature, if not geographically). 

 4.  This recent video which caused the fuss in the Middle East and Libya – which I haven’t seen, by the way – supposedly accuses Muhammed of being a pedophile.  Yet it’s common knowledge that he married his favorite wife, Aisha, when she was 6, and consummated the marriage (i.e. took her virginity) at age 9.   To call the Koran misogynist would be a massive understatement.  Even Aisha herself complained that Muslim women have a rough time.

 5.  Then there’s this business of “Heaven”.  Muhammed describes it as a pleasure palace of unbelievable wealth and beauty, and of course the 72 virgins.  This sounds awesome, fantastic!  In fact, it sounds a little TOO awesome and fantastic.  “Kill all these people.  And when you die, you have unbelievable sex, we’re talking GROUP SEX.  Orgies for eternity.”  All these instructions, mind you, supposedly coming from the same God who sent His only son down to Earth to die for our sins.   

 6.  Again, Muhammed was essentially a warlord who conquered the Arabian peninsula in his lifetime (570-632 AD).  His “revelations” from Allah were mostly self-serving and arguably calculated to attract followers to his military cause.  At the time, Christian doctrine was that “Islam” was merely a sham designed to justify Muhammed’s military campaign.  Looking at it objectively, that appears to be pretty much right on the money.  Certainly if you’re an atheist you would be more inclined to believe this as well.

 Now, I do not believe that Muslims around the world honestly believe that they are praying to Satan, the Lord of Darkness, five times a day.  Nor do I believe that they consider Muhammed a prophet of evil, much less a simple fraudulent warlord.  Moreover, the more radical and bloodthirsty elements of Islam seem to register only with the poorest, most hopeless Muslims, in the poorest, most hopeless Muslim countries.  I don’t see rich Arab sheikhs blowing themselves up.  Likewise, with the 800 lb gorilla exception of the 19 9/11 hijackers, we don’t see Muslims in the US blowing themselves up.  The Onion ran a piece about an Al Qaeda cell in the US which was postponing its jihad until after its free Netflix subscription ran out, or the season of “Heroes” ended, as they’d just bought a new plasma screen TV (FARS seems to have missed that one).  Ahmed in the US with a wife and kids and a decent job doesn’t seem particularly inclined to strap explosives to himself and blow up a bunch of infidels; he’s more inclined to enjoy the good life in the US and otherwise remain a devout Muslim, praying to Mecca, eating Halal food, and going to the mosque on Friday.   But Ahmed in Gaza, a 16 year old boy too shy to talk to girls and with no job prospects, is probably more inclined to listen to the local madrasa cleric and trade a life of poverty and involuntary celibacy for an afterlife of untold riches and nonstop orgies. 

 To finish off with C.S. Lewis again, in The Last Battle, Aslan told the children that while Tash may be Satan, the situation is a bit more complex than that.  “Good works done in the name of Tash are in fact done in my name, and evil works done in my name are in fact done for Tash.”  He recognized that many of the Calormenes (his fantasy equivalent of the Muslims) were in fact virtuous, whereas some Narnians (Europeans) were evil and sinful.   Viewed that way, we could consider Muslims who mind their own business and live peaceful, decent lives just as favorably as we do fellow Christians who behave the same way, regardless of what some angry imam in Iran – chastising such Muslims as backsliders, non-devout, complacent, corrupt, etc. for interacting favorably with non-Muslims and abandoning the cause of advancing Islam and jihad – may bark and bray about from Tehran or wherever else he might be.  

The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe

I was referred to C.S. Lewis by my brother, through the backdoor of The Great Divorce, Lewis’ story about Heaven and Hell.   Although I had read the Elric books by Moorcock, and the Lord of the Rings trilogy (and the Silmarillion) by Tolkien, I had never read any of Lewis’ books.  I had seen “Prince Caspian” on DVD, but my impression of Lewis was that he was “Tolkien Lite”, very much a childlike, less sophisticated variant of Tolkien.  But if I could handle 7 Harry Potter books, surely Lewis was not beyond my tolerance.

 The Chronicles of Narnia are the books for which he’s most well-known. This order is completely different than the actual publishing order and was established after all seven books were published.

 The Magician’s Nephew.  Nominally the first book, Lewis wrote this after LWW as a prequel.  He introduces us to Aslan, the White Witch, Digory Kirke (the “Professor” in LWW), and Narnia, which actually Aslan brought into existence here.  I followed my brother’s advice and read this after LWW.

 The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe [hereinafter, LWW].  Clearly the Dark Side of the Moon of Lewis’ series.  The Pevensie children – Peter, Susan, Edmund and Lucy – are introduced to the magical world of Narnia via a magic wardrobe portal.  Narnia is a magic land of centaurs, fauns, satyrs, dwarves, an evil White Witch, and the ever-popular talking lion, Aslan.  It starts out as a land of perpetual winter and snow – but no Christmas – but as Aslan’s power grows, spring returns and the snowmelts.  There is even a London lamp-post in the middle of nowhere. Theoretically you could get by with only reading this book, as it stands alone well on its own; indeed, Lewis wrote this one first and originally did not plan on writing any sequels. 

 The Horse and His Boy.  This is somewhat of a sidetrack to introduce the Calormenes to us, who are Lewis’ cartoonish, fairy-tale analogs to Earth’s Muslims/Saracens – think “Aladdin” and “Ali Baba and the 40 Thieves”.  They worship Tash, a deity whose true nature is revealed in The Last Battle.  Although they seem to have a rivalry with Narnia, to call them villains or enemies to Narnia is a bit of a stretch.  Tactically, the story involves two talking horses and a “Prince and the Pauper” plot with a noble-born boy, Shasta, who escapes his humble upbringing in the Muslim world and finds his twin Narnian prince brother.  He’s accompanied by Aravis, a stuck-up little Jasmine princess trying to escape an arranged marriage to some loathsome old noble.
  

 Prince Caspian.  Narnia has been taken over by an outside king, Miraz, and his Hamlet-like nephew Caspian enlists the aid of the oppressed talking Narnian animals – and eventually the assistance of Peter, Edmund, and Lucy – in overthrowing Miraz and liberating Narnia.  This has been made into a movie by the same people who made LWW.

 The Voyage of the Dawn Treader.  A punk-like kid, Eustace Scrubb, the cousin of the Pevensies, is pulled into this adventure along with Edmund and Lucy, joining Prince Caspian on a voyage to the eastern seas to find his 7 uncles, lords who were banished by Miraz, also to discover exactly what lies in the eastern seas of Narnia (possibly Aslan’s homeland).  Along the way, Scrubb turns into a dragon and learns not to be a spoiled punk-ass.  This story has a very Star Trek (original series and movie VI) kind of flavor to it; it’s one of the better ones.  Sure enough, it’s due out in digital 3D on December 10.

 The Silver Chair.  Scrubb returns and pulls in Jill Pole (I love that name – Lewis would have done well to provide stage names for exotic dancers) who are enlisted by Aslan to rescue Caspian’s grandson, who had been captured and enchanted (not yet seduced, it seems) by a successor Evil Witch to the White Witch; this one uses a magical chair instead of candy.  They are assisted by Puddleglum, a depressing, tall and skinny elf-like creature. 

 The Last Battle.  This is the last story.  Scrubb returns again with Jill to Narnia.  It seems that a talking ape, Shift, has persuaded his donkey pal Puzzle to put on a lion’s skin and impersonate Aslan.  Claiming to be Aslan’s “mouthpiece”, as it were, Shift invites the Calormenes to enslave all the talking animals of Narnia.  Tirian, a direct descendant of Caspian, gets Scrubb and Jill to assist him in the resistance to Shift’s new form of tyranny, and they manage to fix everything.  Remarkably, the deity whom the Calormenes worship, Tash, is revealed to be something close to Satan; however, Aslan explains that “good deeds done in the name of Tash are in fact done in my name, whereas evil deeds done in my name are in fact done for Tash”, echoing Dante’s concept of “virtuous pagans”. Another remarkable element is that once Puzzle is revealed to the Dwarves to be a fake Aslan, the Dwarves then refuse to accept the existence of the real Aslan.  Anyhow, Lewis wraps everything up with this story in a grand climactic finale which ties up all the loose ends and ensures there will NOT be an eighth book.  No word on a movie of this, or whether Eddie Murphy will voice Puzzle.

 The stories are nicely illustrated by Pauline Baynes, in a manner reminiscent of Tenniel’s Alice in Wonderland stories.  They were published around the same time as Lord of the Rings (early-to-mid 1950s), and Lewis and Tolkien were good friends and colleagues at Oxford.

 Narnia.  Unlike Middle Earth, which Tolkien apparently intended as a very old version of Earth, Narnia is a parallel dimension.  It gets confusing, because within the “world” of Narnia is a nation of Narnia, separate from some other nations such as the Calormenes.  The nation of Narnia is meant to be what we think of as fairy tale Europe, a romanticized and glamorized Camelot-type Euro-centric nation of blond haired, blue eyed Northern Europeans, as opposed to the swarthy, dark-skinned, Tash-worshipping Calormenes.  In Prince Caspian, the ruling class is said to Telmarines, as distinct from Narnians, but where the Telmarines come from is never quite explained. 

 Animals.  There are several classes of animals.  In Magician’s Nephew, Aslan separated the animals into talking, intelligent ones, who are slightly larger than their nontalking nonintelligent counterparts.  There are also giants, halfway between mythical giants and the Norse “jotuns”.  There are fauns, satyrs, centaurs (Greek mythology), dwarves, dragons, etc.  I don’t recognize any races or animals specifically created by Lewis; he seemed to be recycling familiar types of monsters and creatures, types the readers would probably already be familiar with from other stories.

 Cast of Characters

Aslan.  Instead of a tall guy with a beard and robes, the Jesus figure of Narnia is a huge, talking lion of immense wisdom and virtual omnipotence.  Aslan tends to stay in the background and ever-so-conveniently come out when he’s most needed.  He is the one who manages to get the Earthbound characters back and forth from Narnia.  Like Jesus, he has the ability to rise from the dead.

 The White Witch.  She is first inadvertently awakened by Digory Kirke and Polly Plummer, escapes to late nineteenth century London, and returns to the newly created Narnia.  Eventually she is defeated in LWW.

 Prince Caspian.  I find the “Princes” to be fairly interchangeable, differing only by generation.  Rilian, the prince of Silver Chair, is his son, and Tirian (Last Battle) is his descendant.

 The Earth Kids. The Earth kids spend years in Narnia, grow up, and then get magically returned to England where they discover that mere minutes have passed there.  They return to Narnia after a year in England and discover that hundreds of years have passed in Narnia.  The “Prince” they befriended in the prior adventure is long dead, and the prince they befriend in the next one is his son, grandson, or heir.  The Earth period, though, is WWII England; I liked how they added the Blitz, with Heinkel He111s dropping their loads over London, to the first movie.

 Peter.  He is the eldest of the Pevensie children and the wisest.  He ends up as High King. 

 Susan.  The older girl.  Later on she’s absent and slammed as being more interested in “nylons and lipstick” than Narnia.

 Edmund.  The younger brother.  In LWW he’s seduced by the White Witch, not by sex but with “Turkish Delight”, a sugary snack popular ages ago in England.  It has an effect on him which in a modern context would be considered crack or crystal meth.  After some “Turkish Delight” rehab he recovers and is OK from there on in.

 Lucy.  The younger sister.  She is the one who initially discovers the magical wardrobe, and unlike Susan does not forsake Narnia when she grows older in England.

 Eustace Scrubb.  He is the cousin of the Pevensies.  His parents are vegetarian atheist liberals with New Age ideas, who prefer to let children do as they please (no discipline whatsoever) and send the boy off to liberal school; no wonder he’s a spoiled punk brat to begin with.  Scrubb is introduced in Voyage, and becomes the main character thereafter.  He meets Jill Pole, who has been mercilessly bullied by the other children.

 Jill Pole.   Scrubb’s female companion in the last few books, almost indistinguishable from Polly Plummer.

 Polly Plummer.  Digory Kirke’s companion in The Magician’s Nephew, a generic girl character.

 Digory Kirke.  He first appears as a boy in The Magician’s Nephew, then as the wizened Professor in LWW, and has a brief cameo in The Last Battle.  Strategically not much of an important character.

 Allegories.  My brother remarked how Tolkien hated allegories and went out of his way to make sure Middle Earth had no clear God vs. Satan; even Sauron is not clearly the Devil.  Lewis himself denied any allegorical intent, insisting that the themes wrote themselves, so to speak.  But the allegories seem too obvious to ignore.  Aslan is blatantly a Jesus-type figure.  The Calormenes are clearly Muslims.

 Occasionally I’ll be at the gym in the morning and stuck on a treadmill in front of a TV tuned to children’s programming.  Unlike movies, which have substantial elements which appeal to adult intelligences, TV shows seem to wield their morals with a sledgehammer and practically zero subtlety.  Lewis’ morality is likewise front and center, impossible to miss.  Having read the seven Harry Potter books by now, and now the 7 (same number!) Narnia books, it’s likewise impossible to miss the clear Lewis influence in J.K. Rowling, far more so than anything Tolkien may have contributed.