What is your preferred reading order?

[I Know His Name Here]

It is my opinion, first time readers MUST read the CoN in the original publication order:
LWW
PC
VDT
SC
HHB
MN
LB

The journey through Narnia flows much more smoothly and makes much more sense to a FIRST TIME reader if one reads the books in that order. The reason I use to support my adamant opinion is simply this: Prequels are NOT meant to be read/viewed first. An author writes a prequel after other books to provide additional information, spoilers if you will, to answer questions the reader might have and tie up loose ends. If one reads the prequel first, it ruins the entire series because the reader/viewer knows too much, too soon. An example of this can be found in the Star Wars movies. If a first time viewer watched those movies in chronological order and not the released order when Darth Vader iconically tells Luke, “I am your father!” the viewer says to him/herself, “So what, big deal, I already know that.” And just like that, the magic, the surprise, the impact of that moment is lost. The same holds true if the Narnia books are read in chronological order for the first time. It makes me so sad to think we have an entire generation reading these classic books in a sequence that spoils the beauty and magic that C.S. Lewis intended. Of course, after ALL of the books and been read in the proper published order, I encourage a chronological reading. And then an “any way you feel like” reading. I can honestly say I’ve read the CoN at least a thousand times each. I so love those books!

[I Know His Name Here]

Just wondering, has anyone ever started LWW, stopped near the end, read HHB, and then gone back and finished LWW? I haven't, but I might. That would truly be chronological order.

Yes I have done that, many times.
But I firmly believe a first time reader should read the CoN in publication order.

[The Rose-Tree Dryad]

I chose original publication order. I originally read the books in the chronological order (didn't know any better; no one else in my family had read them and I was at the mercy of Harper Collins ) and I've always regretted that.

I remember reading LWW after MN and thinking, "Oh, I know what that is..." when Lucy found the lamp-post in the wintery woods. Hardly the reaction of wonder and curiosity that you'd hope to have! It kind of takes you right out of the story, because ideally you'd be feeling just like Lucy, but instead you're thinking about everything you already know.

I'd definitely recommend reading LWW first, and then MN before LB.

[aileth]

I put "other" because I rarely read them in any kind of order. When the fancy strikes I pull out a book, whichever one feels right for the moment. Nor do I always go through the whole thing; there are passages that I prefer, and because I have read each book enough times, I know what happened elsewhere.

That said, when I recommend the series (particularly in my job as school librarian) I always recommend starting with LWW, basically following publication order. The funny thing is that the school does not have a matching set--MN says 1 and so does LWW--leading to great confusion. I have to explain it, and usually take the time to put in a plug for the whole series

[Meltintalle]

In my personal reading, I'm also an other type of person. I'll get a craving for a particular story or passage, and dive right in.

If I were to read through all seven, I imagine I would go for publication order. I did find some of the other orders suggested in-thread intriguing. I might have to try 'em if I remember...

At one point, I did have a fascination with putting things in order by the timeline, but I seem to have outgrew that impulse. (Or maybe it's just that my set is scattered over numerous bookshelves so there's not as much possibility for rigid "It MUST go in this order" shelving.)

[jewel]

In order they were published I prefer them in reading. The story in this order makes it revealed as the fascinating history of Narnia.

[Future Narnian]

I would say chronological order because that was how I discovered the series. And I like reading things in order - I was always obsessed with finding the first episode of a TV show or the first book in a series. I like knowing how things begin. And it kind of drives me crazy when they decide to do a prequel late in a series - it just feels strange.

It also made the Magician's Nephew more mysterious and intense, because I didn't know anything of what to expect. I really came into Narnia like Digory and Polly - I had no idea of who could be trusted or what this place was going to be like at all. I didn't have the benefit of the beavers saying Aslan was good. In fact, I wasn't even sure if these books were going to be good!

I grew up in a pretty conservative Christian home that shied away from any stories with magic in general. My mom and I read the Exitorn Adventures aloud together (Christian medieval fantasy series by Peggy Downing) and when we finished them, Mom was trying to find another good set of adventure books for us to read. A friend of hers owned a Christian book store and she recommended them to us. (In fact, she was the reason we read them in the order we did - she said she was out of the set that was in chronological order and she felt the books would be easier to understand that way, so we had to wait until she got another set in) Mom wasn't real thrilled with the mention of witches, but since they had been in the Christian bookstore she gave them a chance. I remember we finished the Magician's Nephew and Mom wasn't sure if we'd keep going or how she felt about the set. I kind of liked them, but they also had a feel like I shouldn't like them. And they were a little creepier than I was used to reading. We started The Lion, The Witch & The Wardrobe, and as soon as we got to Aslan's resurrection everything completely changed. We understood the symbolism and why they were in a Christian bookstore and we both completely fell in love with them. And I'm not sure if it would have been the same if we'd had that experience with the first book - I like that it took a little for us to come to that because it made it a larger experience.

The funny thing is that the school does not have a matching set--MN says 1 and so does LWW--leading to great confusion. I have to explain it, and usually take the time to put in a plug for the whole series

Aileth, it's funny that you would mention that. My cousin got a set with the publication order and I remember him insisting that this was the right order and I couldn't figure out how he could be so wrong. I didn't have my copies with me because we were visiting him and they lived in a different city, but I remember thinking the next time I was going to bring them and show him he was wrong! I never did though.

[PhelanVelvel]

It also made the Magician's Nephew more mysterious and intense, because I didn't know anything of what to expect. I really came into Narnia like Digory and Polly - I had no idea of who could be trusted or what this place was going to be like at all. I didn't have the benefit of the beavers saying Aslan was good. In fact, I wasn't even sure if these books were going to be good!

Interesting. Probably the best argument for reading them in chronological order that I've heard.

[johobbit]

Interesting discussion, indeed!

And now, nearly two years later, I read this article as to why this author (among others) strongly adheres to the Chronicles being read in publication order.

I grew up reading them in chronological order, and did not even consider any other way until I joined NarniaWeb. We read the Chronicles to our own children chronologically. I guess we will have a chance to change that with our future grandchildren ... whenever they come.

[Dimitris]

Other reading order.

Allow to me expressing my opinion about this , even after 4 years from the last post!

Before I begin, I want to ask you to be patient about my english. Εnglish language is not my native language and I hope my writing will be understandable to you.

I read the books in p.o and I have to say that after reading the series, I didn’t felt I read the books in the best order.

First of all I disagree about the 6th place of MN (p.o) for the following reasons:

1) Reading it so late, it seems to be a kind of “sticking out”. Since it has more to do with LWW, then it would be better to read it afterwards the LWW.

2) It contains valuable informations which lose their meaning when read so late.

About the HB’s place, I want to say that I disagree by reading it after SC (p.o). Yes I already know the SC’s sentence: “(I haven’t time to tell it now, though it is well worth hearing.) SC-Chapter III” but I think this line it’s unnecessary!

Ιt may by HB published after SC, but the truth is C.S Lewis began (and finished) the HB before SC. So it seems that Lewis’s intention was HB to be published before SC. SC published before HB because of “Caspian trilogy”. About the SC’s sentence, I suppose that it added later as only reason for creating a “Caspian trilogy”. If I am wrong please tell me.

So I believe that HB should read first for the following reason:

While reading the bard poem, you feel a powerful nostalgia about a story of “long ago”, like hearing an old legend. Ιf you read them in p.o, then the bard’s paragraph it is not so important anymore. I hardly think so if anyone remember at the end of the book, the “promise” of the sentence (..it is well worth hearing..),and, in addition the names of the bard’s story. Only when you have read first HB, the bard’s song has a great meaning (or after reading the bard’s song, start reading the HB :Ρ ).

As about the “I haven’t time to tell it now...” I suggest to everyone to erase this sentence with a pencil. About the place of HB, my suggestion is to take place after the MN. So from HB until SC, the time is very “long” and the nostalgia of the bard’s song is getting more powerfull.

So IMHO the best reading order is:

The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe
The Magician's Nephew
The Horse and His Boy
Prince Caspian
The Voyage of the Dawn Treader
The Silver Chair
The Last Battle

In this way the “flagship” of the book series the LWW stays first, and follows a real chronological order without any confusion in the series. Αfter we read the main Narnia story the LWW, we starting from MN (the creation), then we move on to HB (LWW times), and then the order Prince Caspian-The Last Battle, describes without baskstories, the rest Narnia stories.

I think this makes perfect sense and satisfies both c.o and p.o fans!

[The Rose-Tree Dryad]

That's an interesting order, Dimitris! I rather like reading The Horse and His Boy before Prince Caspian (that's the way it's ordered in the HarperCollins editions, which I own), but I've never thought about reading The Magician's Nephew right after The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe. I would definitely prefer that to "pure" chronological order, where MN comes first! I find that I don't mind reading MN before The Last Battle, though — reading about the beginning of Narnia and the end of Narnia back-to-back can be rather epic, I think.

SC published before HB because of “Caspian trilogy”. About the SC’s sentence, I suppose that it added later as only reason for creating a “Caspian trilogy”. If I am wrong please tell me.

If I had to guess, I would say that SC was published before HHB so there would be more continuity with the character of Eustace, but creating a Caspian trilogy could also be true, too. (I notice that in your preferred order, there is a Caspian trilogy and a Eustace trilogy — PC, VDT, and SC for Caspian, and VDT, SC, and LB for Eustace!)

[Col Klink]

There's also a Pevensie trilogy.

Anyway, I actually ended up reading the books in an order closer to Dimitris' as a kid, mainly because Prince Caspian seemed like a story about surviving in the wilderness and the Voyage of the Dawn Treader seemed like a story with a lot of technical nautical stuff. I wasn't really interested in either of those genres. The beginnings of The Magician's Nephew and The Horse and his Boy struck me as more engaging. If I'm absolutely honest, they still do. But my mind has grown broad enough that I think if were starting the series now, I could read it in publication order with no issues. I wouldn't say it did me harm to read it in the order I did though. (Glad I didn't read MN before The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe!)

[Dimitris]

I find that I don't mind reading MN before The Last Battle, though — reading about the beginning of Narnia and the end of Narnia back-to-back can be rather epic, I think.

I can understand you. But I didn't like the fact I learned so late the reason of talking animals. I would like to know it earlier.

(I notice that in your preferred order, there is a Caspian trilogy and a Eustace trilogy — PC, VDT, and SC for Caspian, and VDT, SC, and LB for Eustace!)

Actually is the same order with Ηar.Collin's order. The only difference is the first two books. I just switch them :Ρ

(Glad I didn't read MN before The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe!)

Το be honest I think this It's not as bad as it sounds. I feel that if I had read the magician first, that would be okay for me. I know all the arguments they support that Lion must be the first book.
I've seen several times the Glumpuddle's youtube videos (several times because there are not eng subtitles and Glumpuddle speaks too fast for my perceptive ability )

I really can't understand the argument "None of the children knew who Aslan was, any more than you do". If we look at it in a strictly grammatically sight then:

any more than you do = children knew ≤ than us. But "any more than you do" does not imply that we do not know anything (about Aslan)!

Perhaps there is a meaning beyond it's grammatical sight. I would like it a lot explain it to me about that.

Also I can't understand why some people use as an argument the last sentence of the "Lion".

"..it was only the beggining of the adventures of the Narnia."

It is clear that the text talking about the Pevensie children and not to us!

[Wanderer Between Worlds]

Hello Dimitris!

I personally prefer publication order, but I do like your order very much. I didn't like HHB that much on my first time reading it because of the huge disconnect between its events and those of SC. I think that your reading order fixes that issue quite nicely.

However, I do think that MN needs to be read after the LWW. For me, the revelation at the end that Digory the professor from LWW and the story of the history behind the wardrobe completely changed my perspective on the Chronicles. It was a missing piece that I didn't know had been missing, and the circle finally felt completed (or as complete as it could be before LB). Even though MN is at first feels awkward and out of place, I still like it directly before LB. There's something poignant about reading about the creation of Narnia before the destruction of it.

For me personally, Aslan is the central character of the Chronicles (he is only constant character throughout all seven books). I think that publication is the best order that characterizes Aslan, so that you as the reader slowly get more and more information about him, yet he still remains somewhat of a mystery. By the time of MN (in publication order), the reader already knows a lot about Aslan, but the knowledge that he created all of Narnia only serves to deepen his character based upon what has already been established (he is the Bridge Builder to all the worlds, he has knowledge of deep and deeper magic, etc.). This may or may or may not be a huge factor for a lot of people's reading of the Chronicles, but these are just my thoughts.

--Wanderer

[Col Klink]

If I may ask, Dimitris, why did you feel like you needed to know the reason for the talking animals earlier? Talking animals are a fairly common idea. I think the number of cultures that tell stories with talking animals is larger than the number of cultures that don't. And there are plenty of other fantastical creatures in Narnia like fauns, dryads, gods, etc.

I really can't understand the argument "None of the children knew who Aslan was, any more than you do". If we look at it in a strictly grammatically sight then:any more than you do = children knew ≤ than us. But "any more than you do" does not imply that we do not know anything (about Aslan)!

Well, the children really don't know anything about Aslan at all. They hadn't spent much time in Narnia. But if the reader is expected to have read The Magician's Nephew, they do know something about Aslan. (They don't everything but they do know a good bit more than the Pevensies.)

I agree though that this disconnect by itself isn't an unanswerable argument in favor of LWW going before MN. However it is part of the larger argument which is that LWW is written and like the first book in a series and MN is written like a prequel. C.S. Lewis introduces the story by saying that it explains "how all the comings and goings between our own world and the land of Narnia first began." This clearly implies that the reader knows-or has had the opportunity to know what Narnia is. (Note that for the Radio Theatre adaptations, which were released in chronological order, this line was changed to "a land called Narnia.") It also says that Digory "became the famous Professor Kirke who comes into other books." It doesn't say the adult Digory may come into other stories, the way Lewis says he may write how the Lone Islands became part of Narnia in VDT. It's clearly implying that those other stories have already been told. (OK, I'll admit that last bit is a little pedantic. )

The ending of MN also leads into the ending of the next chronological story in a way none of the other endings do. "(Digory) had part of the timber made into a wardrobe, which he put in his big house in the country. And though he himself did not discover the magical properties of that wardrobe, someone else did. That was the beginning of all the comings and goings between Narnia and our world, which you can read of in other books." The Voyage of the Dawn Treader, for example, doesn't end with "Everyone kept saying how Eustace had changed for the better. One of those people was a schoolmate of his called Jill Pole. And that was how she ended up returning to Narnia with Eustace one day." This ending sticks out like a sore thumb unless we assume the book's supposed to be a prequel.

I'm sorry if I seem intolerant of anyone who likes chronological order. It just takes a lot of words to explain this opinion so I risk coming across as fanatical. I've never seen the books as being little connected stories, not one big story, so it never really bugged me if they jump around in a timeline or if characters show up in one who don't show up in others. And I don't see any reason to believe Lewis had a problem with that either.

[Dimitris]

Hello Dimitris!
I didn't like HHB that much on my first time reading it because of the huge disconnect between its events and those of SC.

I have to say something more about the HB's place. About the MN's place I support to read it after Lion. But I have to admit that I had doubts about the HB. Paul Ford supports HB can be read before SC and after VDT. Also I have an argument about this:

Reading HB after VDT, a "contrast" is created. You are moving on from deep seas to the vast deserts. From the coolness of the liquid element to the unbearable heat of the sand.
Μaybe it sounds to you silly. It's just a directorial perspective. :Ρ

If I may ask, Dimitris, why did you feel like you needed to know the reason for the talking animals earlier? Talking animals are a fairly common idea. I think the number of cultures that tell stories with talking animals is larger...

Ιn Narnia there is selectivity in speech. Some animals speaks, some don't. It was a little "strange" for me (even for a fairy tale). I think it would be better to be known from the beginning.

.."how all the comings and goings between our own world and the land of Narnia first began." This clearly implies..

I felt the same when I started read the MN.

As I said, I suggest that Lion should be read first. I can see clearly that the MN is a prequel. I have already the books.
If I "support" the MN can be read first, I only claim this because I generally prefer a chronological reading. (Ι chose to read Silmarillion first than LotR :Ρ)

Ι like chronological order. I wish there was a chronological order without inconsistencies.
Lion is the first book and the Magician is a prequel. No doubt about that

ps: I hope all this makes sense to you!