>>8107351
It's an okay kid's book.

>>8107351
I remember really liking them as a kid but I remember literally nothing about them

>>8107351
Better than Harry Potter for kids.
I thought they were great in third grade.

books 1, 2, and 3 are great. 4, 5, and 6 really drag, iirc. The last one is sad and beautiful. If you don't enjoy The Magician's Nephew, try starting with the second one instead.

>>8107351
I dunno. I've only watched the movies.

>>8107351
Average children's lit, mostly notable for being very ahead-of-its-time

>>8107391
>Better than Harry Potter

How so?

Mere Christian propaganda.

Is it worth reading these as an adult if I've never read them?

>>8107431
>being very ahead-of-its-time
implying

>>8107448
Harry Potter is seven books of the same story with different details. It's full of silly crap but takes itself super seriously, mostly in response to its fans taking it seriously.

The Narnia books manage to handle even the silly stuff in them in a mature way, it maintains a serious tone all the way through. Each book is a separate type of story, (an odysseian sea voyage, a creation myth, etc). It changes characters over time, but remembers the old ones.

Essentially the Narnia books are mirrors of classical writings dressed up for children. The Harry Potter books are high school dramas/mysteries dressed up for children.

>>8107514
This. Been thinking of picking up the series but i'm unsure. I read the TLTWATW in second grade and liked it but i've never read the other books.

>>8107351
read all of them at the age of nine. Don't remember much though so they probably weren't as good as I remember them to be.

>>8107351
I thought the second one was the first one

>>8108220
It was the first one published but Magician's Nephew is the first one chronologically