C.S. Lewis
One should always take care criticizing what one has little knowledge. The extent of my knowledge of Lewis are quotes offered on occasion, testimonials of his greatness, and a partial reading of the Chronicles of Narnia. I had started reading the latter to my children, and we became bored with it. They were probably too young for the book, and science fiction is a genre that I don’t enjoy. Although I’m not attempting to get excommunicated here, I confess to not having an interest in Lord of the Rings by Tolkien either. This is not a commentary on the literary quality of the works, just one man’s taste in genres.
C.S. Lewis is one of the few non-Catholic authors considered to be great articulators of Catholic philosophy. My understanding is that he was a high church Anglican, but I also understand that the consensus amongst scholars is that he most likely would have never converted to Rome even with the benefit of seeing what the Church of England became. Admittedly such is speculation, but it is speculation more informed than my own. And I do not write this to try and claim that men have to be particularly holy to offer great insights. Those familiar with Orthodox writer Dostoevsky’s biography know quite well that he did not live the life of a Saint. I am surprised that such insights came from someone caught in a culture that had very much embraced the Enlightenment.
I am claiming that I have not seen the insights of Lewis as provided in quotation to be all that profound. Some I would go so far as to say have debatable merit. Admittedly I’m not the measure for determining that which is profound or insightful. I am curious however if there are other Lewis doubters out there. I am curious if there are works demolishing the Lewis mythos. I am curious if I just need to sit and read “Mere Christianity” and accept the legend and his brilliance. For those who have read some of scriblings, would any Lewis work have particular appeal for me?
Comments are closed.
MZ
Heresy! And more heresy! And even more heresy!
There, I said it.
Ok, now I will say a few more things. Lewis is often abused; only select works of his are read, his best works neglected. I am a great fan of his, but he would be one of the first to offer criticism of his “popular apologetics” later in life.
If you want greatness, start with “Till We Have Faces.” It’s a literary classic; it starts slow, but it is one of the most profound works of literature in the 20th century. Then I recommend people to read “God in the Dock.” His essays are quite good, especially, for example, “Myth became fact.” His short novel, “The Great Divorce” is also a great piece and very influential (Balthasar really liked it) and I think it offers great eschatological insight.
Tolkien was quite critical of Narnia; he thought Lewis mixed too many traditions together, breaking the sub-creator’s art and making instead a big mess. There is a lot of good in Narnia, but it is a children’s story, and must be understood as such; it is not the best in the genre, but there are some exceptional aspects to some of the stories.
C.S. Lewis contributed greatly to Christian inspiration. He is revered for his charmingly disarming and simplistic way of description and assessment. To suggest he is one of the best is silly — he just appealed to the people in a way very few have been capable of.
I would suggest actually reading his material before gathering support against him.
Although I’m not attempting to get excommunicated here, I confess to not having an interest in Lord of the Rings by Tolkien either.
Me neither! :) Just like you, I just don’t like that literary genre. I appreciate more the literature that has true social backdrops. Novels by Latin American authors (Isabel Allende, Gabriel Garcia Marquez y Romulo Gallegos) are quite good.
Katerina — while the genre might not be what you would appreciate (and I would say the genre is not, as people assume, fantasy, but 19th century Pre-Raphaelite Romanticism following Morris), Tolkien does have considerable interest in the social backgrounds and has it throughout his works, developing various kinds of societies and social structures, often demonstrating the problems within and without those traditions. Indeed, he works on it to such a detail that you can find these social dimensions and values put within the languages of the different groups, which presents to us an interesting insight to the mores of the different races and human traditions within Middle Earth. He also shows how even the most perverted of races, such as the Orcs, are not pure evil, but are the result of external perversion worked on them and yet the kind which makes their innate goodness remains and not entirely snuffed out.
Oh and as to conversion: no, I don’t think so. He had many Catholic friends and was ecumenical in mindset, but as Tolkien realized, there was too much influence of the Ulster Protestant mentality in Lewis to ever convert.
Professor Peter Kreeft (Catholic) has done great work with Lewis.
I recommend all the talks on his website, especially this one:
http://www.peterkreeft.com/audio/13_lost-in-the-cosmos/peter-kreeft_lost-in-the-cosmos.mp3
Others found here:
http://www.peterkreeft.com/audio.htm
Joseph Pearce wrote a great book on Lewis’s views on & struggles with Catholicism in a book called ‘C.S. Lewis and the Catholic Church.’ It’s a great read and will help you better understand some of Lewis’s gifts and his failures. Whether or not Lewis ultimately would have converted will be eternally questionable, however Pearce suggests that Lewis’s attitudes on women priests for one would have made remaining an Anglican exceptionally problematic. But then again, his belief in purgatory was already problematic from an Anglican view.
Katerina: While one need not read Tolkien to be Catholic, I do question your statement “I appreciate more the literature that has true social backdrops.” Fantasy and science fiction have plenty to say about society. In fact, some might argue that their ability to construct new societies allows more freedom in criticizing society than other genres. “1984″ would be a great example. Additionally, the need to construct a society forces the author to think about society in ways that most regular fiction writers don’t have to. Ultimately, the greatest example of this is Tolkien, who manages to construct an astoundingly detailed society and comments on it in a particularly Catholic way, as Henry Karlson pointed out.
This doesn’t mean you have to like fantasy; it’s a matter of taste after all. However, I think we should be careful to recognize that the genre does have a lot to say about society. Considering the popularity of fantasy movies in franchises like Spiderman & Lord of the Rings, I wonder if we can effectively dialogue with the modern world without if not a knowledge and understanding at least an appreciation. More people have read Tolkien and Lewis than have Balthasar & MacIntyre, after all.
I agree with what most of what Henry said.
In my case, Lewis was formative to my thinking. He first got me thinking systematically about theology and philosophy.
Lewis has many profound insights, but they’re not necessarily insights that other theologians haven’t had before him. He himself admitted as much in many places in his writings. He stuck, as much as he could given his background, to tradition. And, he tried to avoid being involved in denominational disputes (although he didn’t always succeed). His charism was his uncommon ability to be able to explain theology to the common man. Other than Augustine, I’ve never read a writer of prose who had a better knack for making complex theological concepts understandable.
I wouldn’t start with Till We Have Faces if I were reading Lewis. It may be his best work of fiction in terms of depth, but it doesn’t feel or sound like much of his other work. For non-fiction, start out with The Abolition of Man, which incidentally is also available online for free because it has fallen into the public domain. This is, in my opinion, Lewis’s best work of non-fiction, and is in many ways prophetic. For works on the spiritual life, The Screwtape Letters and Letters to Malcolm Chiefly on Prayer are my favorites. I think that his most emotionally touching work is A Greif Observed, which he wrote upon the death of his wife.
I must say, though, M.Z., that I sympathize with you somewhat. I can’t see what was so great about another highly regarded early 20th century writer, G.K. Chesterton. I pushed my way through Orthodoxy, but I really can’t stomach his style, even though many people seem to be crazy over him.
Narnia — science fiction?!? Lewis did write a trilogy of space novels that were basically science fiction, but that label definitely doesn’t fit the Narnia books.
In any event, I’d suggest reading The Abolition of Man, The Great Divorce, and the revised edition of Miracles.
I agree with the first paragraph, about Lord of the Rings — heresy though it may seem, to some … but I’m numb to the allure of most fiction of any kind …
As far as Lewis goes, I like especially Letters to Malcolm : Chiefly on Prayer.
I’ve also just finished re-reading Mere Christianity, and reading for the first time Letters to an American Lady. Recommended.
With all due respect, you should read a book or two of his before offering a posting asking for other naysayers. The simple fact is, he has inspired countless Christians, regardless of how much you may or may not like his works (or quotes from said works). You really shouldn’t disparage him (or approach the first stages of) until you’ve read some things. Try Mere Christianity or The Great Divorce or many others.
A few brief notes:
- I enjoy reading criticisms. They can tell you a lot. Possibly due to recentness, the criticisms I saw were feminist ones in a quick search. Nothing impressive there. A lack of criticism generally notes a non-controversial work. Often a good critique can express the proponents position as well as he. Certainly one could use a critique to form one’s mind on a subject. That is however very dangerous when one doesn’t have a cursory knowledge of the subject being critiqued.
- I can understand the position being articulated that doesn’t consider Lord of the Rings et al to be science fiction although I didn’t use the term. Personally, the Odyssey is as close as I’ve come to enjoying mythological work. On the fiction side of the equation, I prefer historical fiction or period specific fiction.
- Along with the first point here, I haven’t really offered a criticism of Lewis here. I confessed from the outset that the mild opinions I held were built on a foundation of sand. Rereading after a long weekend, I see I included “demolishing the Lewis mythos”. That could certainly be interpreted as me lacking good will going into the question. I did however finish asking for recommendations, and I did throughout the post note that position was amenable to change. Perhaps I could receive a few credits in that departement?
MZ
I put the “heresy” in for jest (I hope you understand that). I am (as I am sure you know) a great fan of the Inklings — all of them. I know many people are not, and their style of writing was not always popular with people (but I do think you would like Warnie Lewis’ books, from what you just said here).
While you might not be able to appreciate the mythic dimension, there are many strengths to it and why it motivates so many — not just from its aesthetic side (which is always a plus) but also in its freedom to explore issues which even historical fiction can never do.
If you want a real interesting analysis on Lewis, get AN Wilson’s biography on him. Wilson comes to Lewis with a critical but appreciative eye and so provides more insight into him because of it.
Actually Henry, I think you fully understood me from the start, and I knew you were jesting on the heresy charge.