Talk:The Horse and His Boy

message: I think the fact that The Horse and his Boy is clearly a retelling of the Exodus story needs to be emphasized more.  Shasta is guided down the river in a basket as a child, just like Moses.  He escapes across the desert (a stand in for the Sinai desert), past the tombs of the kings (a stand in for the pyramids), meets Aslan on the top of a mountain (just as Moses met with God) and escapes first to Archenland (a stand in for Midian) and then to Narnia (a stand in for the Promised Land), etc. Joey1898 23:52, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure, beef that section up some. What you've written here would be a good place to start.  Of course, make sure you site sources for the matterial. LloydSommerer 02:37, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Current statements in the article are good. Lets make sure we don't go overboard. THAHB is *not* a retelling of Exodus. The Pevensies were already firmly established as 'righteous' kings and queens of Narnia at the beginning, which is the complete opposite of Exodus when Canaan was ruled by 'pagan' tribes and needed to be conquered by God's people. Let's not make parallels with Exodus a major section - just 1 or 2 paragraphs under Commentary I would suggest. --DreamsReign 00:20, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't really see this (OP's premise) at all; this is NOT a retelling of Exodus. Quill 03:54, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Exodus 

message: I think the statement at the very end of the article is a bit out there, really.  There's been little indication, aside from Adamson's hope-I-get-to-be-director claim that he wants to do all seven, that there's anything like a goal to make this film.  Of all the books, Horse and Nephew are the two least likely to be made, at this very early stage of the franchise, simply because they involve the Pevensies only in minor ways (if at all).  The filmmakers have said in interviews other than those already cited that the priority in production order is doing those that involve the Pevensie children quickly before they grow up too much.  Calling a film probably a decade a way "likely"--if the franchise is still even doing good business by then--is just way too strong.CzechOut 07:20, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I heard a rumour that they were not doing it at all given the way that portraying Calormen as it is in the book is very likely to upset Muslim viewers or Muslim countries. They got away with the Spanish version of Telmar in Prince Caspian but I'd like to see how they managed Calormen without upsetting at least somebody in the Muslim or Arab world. I think he is satirising Turkey or Iran, but inevitably you are going to run into problems casting Rabadash or the Tisroc. Any thoughts or any confirmation of this rumour? Lstanley1979 (talk) 15:18, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: ''Likely'' film?

message: The info box says the book was proceeding by Lion and followed by Caspian.  While this is choronolocially correct, it was publish as the sixth book.  Should the info box reflect this?
--Jvsett 16:54, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have asked this question before and was told that it should reflect the reading order of the books.  --NeilEvans 17:09, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: All the books are listed in published order now, and I believe they should stay that way.--roger6106 20:13, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Order in Infobox

message: Should it be mentioned that Aslan is the lion that attacks Aravis?--roger6106 20:13, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That is a huge spoiler and is best left to the book. Lstanley1979 (talk) 15:50, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lion 

message: :Image:Horseandhisboy.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
:Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
::If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
::BetacommandBot (talk) 22:47, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair use rationales have now been included on the image description pages of both fair use book cover images included in this article. --Lini (talk) 06:42, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Horseandhisboy.jpg

message: This page has been vandalised recently with words changed slightly to turn it into sexual innuendo, I think I got rid of it all though.
Unregistered user, 06/03/08  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.151.140.130 (talk) 17:01, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Vandalism on 6 March 2008

message: I've moved the following text out of the article (it had originally been in the Commentary and Notes section, which I renamed to Themes and Motifs when restructuring section headers in February 2008.) My reason for moving it is that, the note about the possible slight error in logic, while I agree is technically correct, per a reading of the novel, has no source cited, hence could be original research, and also does not seem of enough significant import to an analysis of the book, to be included in an article of this (relatively short) length.  I have included it here on the talk page in case others disagree and believe the article would be improved by adding it back in.  The last few sentences below, mentioning the effect of meeting Aslan on the characters, is, I believe, thematically important, and should be re-introduced, with citation, however, and should read less like part of a plot summary.  Perhaps this text was originally part of the plot summary and then was moved to Commentary and Notes at a time before my first experience with this article.
:When the horses and Aravis prepare to leave the Hermit's house and resume their journey to Narnia, Hwin reminds them they need to say goodbye to Shasta. This may represent a slight error in the logic of the book, since they do not know at this point Shasta's true identity and that he would be staying in Archenland.  On the other hand, after helping to save Archenland from the oncoming assault, there's no reason why he would leave immediately.  They assume that he must be in Anvard, but before they can leave to see him, their plan is interrupted by a 'visitor' none other than Aslan himself. Later, they are visited again, this time by Shasta, who to their amazement is actually Cor, the crown prince of Archenland. The effect of the two visits leaves each of them a better horse, or person, as the case may be.
::Thanks, Lini (talk) 02:17, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Text regarding "possible error in logic" moved from article -  

message: Hey all. Call me wrong if you think so, but I don't think a summary of a book needs citations other than referencing the book. Especially for facts mentioned in the novel. I suppose references are necessary when some deep thoeries are conjured, but I don't believe this is the case here. Drorzm (talk) 00:45, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree in general, though there is the occasional exception. Is there a specific concern that you have regarding this article? Doniago (talk) 15:31, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citations/references not needed 

message: The term used nowadays is midquel... AnonMoos (talk) 18:46, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Relationship to ''The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe''

message: I have just made some minor style edits, corrections and limited additions, all of which were reverted.  An exchange of views with the editor responsible followed, which I have copied to this page in case any other enthusiast for the world of Narnia wishes to add their opinions.
::I don't want to get in an edit war over the The Horse and His Boy article but a couple of the changes that you reverted related to minor factual errors. Would you have any objection to my correcting those? Others were intended to be style improvements - admittedly a matter of personal taste. This was my favorite book as a child and I just couldn't resist the temptation to expand on Calormen politics. Buistr (talk) 04:42, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: What factual errors are you addressing? As for the rest, we have tried hard to keep the plot summaries under control, as MOS:PLOT suggests. As I said, these are supposed to be summaries -- they are not the place for extended description. The idea is that a person should recognize the book from previous reading, not substitute for the reading itself! -- Elphion (talk) 22:09, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Some edits - justified or not?