Bringing WHAT back to Narnia? |
by Gina Dalfonzo |
As one of my colleagues points out, there is something not quite right about putting Narnia and sexy in the same sentence. And I don't care how snarky Philip Pullman gets about it.
About
Blogroll
+ Theology/Religion + Culture + Marriage & Family + Politics + Academia + Human Rights
   |
| Note: No one at The Point, BreakPoint Online, or Prison Fellowship is responsible for the content of any of the blogs listed above, except where noted. A blog’s presence does not necessarily imply endorsement. |
« Navigating Beauty | Main | The Not-Yet Stinks »
January 29, 2008
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c635553ef00e5500d21ea8834
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Bringing WHAT back to Narnia?:
Comments
The comments to this entry are closed.
Point Radio
Point Poll
Recent Posts
Recent Comments
- Jim D. on Glass houses
- matthew on As the French might say, this is just a little ’de trop’
- Dan Gill on Glass houses
- jason taylor on Getting things done
- jason taylor on Glass houses
- Dan Gill on Glass houses
- Dan Gill on As the French might say, this is just a little ’de trop’
- jason taylor on A Rabbi on the ’Paradox’ of Evangelicals
- jason taylor on Stuff Christians Hate (Or Should)
- Steve Davis on Stuff Christians Hate (Or Should)
I totally agree. If Lewis had wanted "sexy" in Narnia he would have put it in there himself.
Barnes isn't sexy, he is supposed to play the role of a kid prince! Get a life if you have to add sexy to everything.
Eric Novak
Posted by: Eric Novak | January 29, 2008 at 03:13 PM
Hear, hear! "Sexy" is a seriously overused adjective. And it definitely doesn't belong in Narnia.
Posted by: Pinon Coffee | January 30, 2008 at 03:53 PM
What??? Listen, there's nothing more important than bringing Sexy Back.
Got it?!!
Sheesh, you prudes don't know nuthin...
Posted by: Justin Timberlake | January 30, 2008 at 05:15 PM