Page 8 of 10

PostPosted: June 12th, 2008, 4:48 pm
by Coyote Goodfellow

PostPosted: June 12th, 2008, 5:16 pm
by repectabiggle

PostPosted: June 12th, 2008, 6:21 pm
by Ben2747

PostPosted: June 13th, 2008, 11:03 pm
by cyranorox

PostPosted: June 14th, 2008, 2:51 am
by rusmeister

PostPosted: June 15th, 2008, 12:28 am
by cyranorox
rus, every time i see your tagline i think of quadratic equations, and problems for which the answer is iherently multiple.

I think you missed my point, then went on to elaborate it as if you were contradicting me. As persons, men and women are equal in Christ. What that means is somewhat myseterious, and neither side should presume to press that claim without charity.

As spouses, there is a difference of role, and should be. Any woman who marries in the OC accepts a submission to one man; not a subordination to men. Any man who marries in the OC is head of his wife, not ahead of women. This shows up most clearly as spouses encounter others of opposite sex: Mrs Jones owes no submission to her brother in law, brother, or any such relations.

Similarly, the absolute authority of a father, as the Roman world thought of it, is transformed to duty and synergy - for no one ought to think that a father or husband does right to wantonly impose his will on his adult child or wife. To a degree, the husband is to his wife as the Patriarch to any bishop - first among equals. He may settle disputes by authority, occasionally -But a good king sees that his people prosper, so he cannot suppress or override the wife's will regularly without impoverishing her life.

the Matrix is delibarately constructed out of literalizations of theological and philosophical ideas, which accounts for my ongoing interest.

Ben, TSE is thinking about class there - these "low" people and their cheap lives. unsexy sex, absence of affection or charity, his use of her, is the main sinfulness here.

The OC does not think that fertility is the only purpose of sex: the ideal couple is Joachim and Anna, parents of Mary, who were obviously sexually active long after her natural fertility was extinct. Sarah and Abraham, too, were active without any natural continuation of fertility - that's what made Sarah laugh. Couples who know their mutual fertility is lost for age, health or injury are still eligible to marry, and their marriages are not of a lesser sort, though they miss out on the blessing of children.

fertility is a great good, and children are the best blessing of God, but we must not think fertility is the only true end of every marriage.

PostPosted: June 15th, 2008, 1:58 am
by rusmeister

PostPosted: June 15th, 2008, 6:33 am
by Ben2747

PostPosted: June 15th, 2008, 7:10 am
by Ben2747

PostPosted: June 16th, 2008, 3:57 am
by rusmeister

PostPosted: June 16th, 2008, 5:28 am
by Ben2747

PostPosted: June 16th, 2008, 9:41 am
by rusmeister

PostPosted: June 16th, 2008, 10:20 pm
by blindlemonpie
My favorite would be Perelandra. I felt that That Hideous Strength was too uneven. It held me in anticipation of a much greater climax on a cosmic scale. I will admit that the cover art is partly to blame for this. Lewis' portrayal of evil throughout his works which I have read is of something which has frightening implications but is weak and pitiful at the core. THS held true to this, but all the same, it made for a weak climax.

PostPosted: June 16th, 2008, 11:31 pm
by repectabiggle
Welcome, blindlemonpie.

I'd disagree that the climax of THS is weak, but I'd agree that the cover art (assuming you mean the editions that show the two sides of the moon in THS) is quite misleading. If it were up to me, all cover art would be done away with for all books. Nice plain cloth covers are so much better and never misleading.

PostPosted: June 17th, 2008, 5:43 am
by Cet
Very interesting conversations going on here...afraid I can't add much to them without feeling like an intruder (or without feeling like I'm lowering the intelligence of the room, more importantly :wink: ), but I just wanted to jump in and answer the original poster...

Perelandra is surely my favorite, with THS as a close second. Reading Perelandra provided me with a lot of "firsts." It was the first time I was really struck with the idea of evil being mundane, even childish, instead of grand and, somehow, romantic. When Ransom says he could have dealt more easily with a creature like Mephistopheles, I knew what he meant. It was also the first time I honestly looked at the sin of disobedience in any sort of mature way. The biggest draw for me though...I'm not sure how to describe it. Perelandra discusses the reasons we fail, the ways by which we're broken (kind of like The Screwtape Letters actually), and as one who often fails, I think the book just went straight to my heart, as silly as that always sounds to me.