Well, you may have been wrong, but I think your brain was kind of on to something. “Through a glass darkly” is from the Bible and is often quoted. The point of the passage is not actually that dissimilar to the point Lewis was making in Till We Have Faces, so I think your addled brain was actually making interesting connections.
Or maybe you’re still on the glue fumes.
A quick note- we’re SUPPOSED to be disturbed by Susan’s being left out. Of course, many are disturbed by the suppsed unfairness of it. Lewis meant for it to be disturbing because we all run the same risk of apostasy.
Yeah, I think that was the connection I was in fact making. I knew what I was talking about, I just wasn’t talking about what I knew. 
In which case he wrote it badly.
Oh yes indeed, thank you for raising this. I was profoundly disturbed by the unfairness of it. As a child reader, I did not grasp any of the finer points of the allegory. As far as I could tell from the text, Susan was booted out of Narnia because she was interested in lipstick. I did not have enough life experience to take this in any way that was not literal. It made me extremely uncomfortable because I myself was starting to become more interested in teen girl things such as lipstick and parties because I was on the verge of being a teen girl.
In CCD, we were also learning that now was the time to put away childish things. TALK ABOUT MIXED MESSAGES. I remember being literally sick over this. As an adult, I get all of this (no one needs to explain it). But as a kid, the whole Susan situation was too subtle for me, and relied too much on implications that I was too young to understand.
I bet some of you got it right away, even as kids. That’s great. There are plenty of other things from various kids’ books that I didn’t understand or went right over my head – some of them are very funny and most of them are a result of my own faulty assumptions. But the Susan issue goes beyond that, I know I am hardly alone. It inevitably comes up every time a group of people starts talking about Narnia. My conclusion is that Lewis was not especially successful in communicating his point about Susan to a young audience.
I don’t think that last part is true.
[spoiler]
Shasta takes the wrong turn following King Lune back to Anvard, rides through the pass and ends up in Narnia. Once he realizes that he’s there, he gets someone to send for the Narnian Cavalry and ends up riding with them back to Archenland.
It sticks in my mind because when Shasta first tries to tell one of the Narnian talking creatures that Archenland is being invaded, the reply he gets is, “Oh, really? Archenland is so far away, isn’t it, I’ve never been there.” And Shasta can hardly process that, considering how far he’s travelled in just a couple of weeks.[/spoiler]
I don’t think it’s Lewis’ fault at all that so many people think Susan was cast out for liking lipstick and stuff, but the fault of the readers. It says right there in the freaking text that Susan denies Narnia even exists, that she claims to have completely forgotten the so-called imaginary land until the others bring it up. She got left out because she quit believing, a concept I think kids are generally pretty up on. The vital importance of belief or disbelief is rampant in children’s entertainment, from clapping your hands and saying you believe in fairies to the Coyote not falling until he looks down and realizes he’s floating in midair. If Dumbo doesn’t believe he can fly, he can’t, and if Susan doesn’t believe in Narnia she can’t go there, just like she couldn’t see Aslan until she was willing believe he was there in Prince Caspian.
No, anyone who thinks Susan was cast out of Narnia because she liked boys and makeup is simply focusing more on their own biases than what is actually written.
Just in case anybody cares, I’ve just opened a thread to compare Lewis with Philip Pullman. Linky.
“Now that I am a man, I have set aside childish things-- including the fear of being thought childish.”
–C. S. Lewis
I believe that many have fail to account for one simple fact ijn relation to Susen. Se did not go to Aslans land because she was not on the trains. Therefore she did not die with her siblings. Lews herself never excluded the possibility of her return to Narnia. He himslef said “The books don’t tell us what happened to Susan. She is left alive in this world at the end, having by then turned into a rather silly, conceited young woman. But there’s plenty of time for her to mend and perhaps she will get to Aslan’s country in the end…in her own way.” (From Lewis’ Letters to Children, 22 January 1957, to Martin). After all, once a King or Queen in Narnia, always a King or Queen in Narnia. As for the Calormen. The Calormen are a revered people in the series, and are frequently praised (I reference Caspian’s experience in the Lone Islands in VDT). The girl from HAHB makes it to Aslan’s land, as do other Calormen. Asland himself said that even though they served Tash, the god of the Calormen, it was as if they served Aslan himself. Lewis condemns the evil individuals of the Calormen who seek their own interests at the expense of others, just as he condemns the evil King Mizra (a Caucasian) and the even more Aryian White Witch. A careful read of the series would suggest that We are bringing our own contemporary thoughts and views to the work with out really understanding what the author was really trying to accomplish and teach.
Far from being prejudiced against Moslems, Lewis was actually a secret Moslem. What’s more, he was preparing the world for the rise of Osama bin Laden. He has his characters worshipping Aslan. “Aslan” is the Turkish word for “lion.” The Arabic word for “lion” is “Osama”. How much more obvious can you get? I’ve notified the proper authorities, and anyone who has expressed support here for Lewis can expect to be picked up and transported to Guantanamo.
[tongue-in-cheek]No no no, he was a crypto-Hindu. Aslan is a type of Krishna.[/t-i-c]
I’m not sure about the putative anti-sex thing. I’ve certainly read some Jack that is REALLY NOT ANTI-SEX, but that was after he was married.
In the Chronicles, he may have simply been framing things in a way that his generation considered “proper for children.”
As for the Calormenes, remember that Lewis was a Universalist (secret Hindu, I’m telling you) & saw differences in theology between religions as basically the same as differences in theological understanding within a communion. (As explained in The Case for Christianity as well as *The Horse & His Boy *& The Last Battle.) The point about the Calormenes is that they really are that backward & alien (foreign) & nasty by modern English standards, & their customs are bizarre–& they really are wrong in some ways (but so are we imperfect)–but they’re not EEEVIL like, oh, pretty much anything in Gygaxian fantasy.
To attack his portrayal of the Calormenes, which is relatively measured, as if it were worse than how he wrote the giants in The Silver Chair, the werewolf in Prince Caspian, the legion of weird critters following Jadis in TLTWATW, or the entirety of dragonkind in Dawn Treader, is hilarious. “Evil races” all around, & you’re concerned about the one with a plausible human culture & redeemable humans?