Page 1 of 2

Does the supernatural weaken THS?: a review by George Orwell

PostPosted: April 12th, 2008, 3:49 am
by rumzy

PostPosted: April 12th, 2008, 9:06 am
by rusmeister

PostPosted: April 12th, 2008, 9:49 am
by Bill

PostPosted: April 12th, 2008, 9:37 pm
by Erekose

PostPosted: April 12th, 2008, 9:58 pm
by Stanley Anderson

PostPosted: April 12th, 2008, 10:09 pm
by galion

PostPosted: April 14th, 2008, 6:18 pm
by rumzy

PostPosted: April 14th, 2008, 8:25 pm
by repectabiggle
I agree, rumzy. I would say that the whole novel is *about* the supernatural breaking in, so how could that ruin the novel? If a person doesn't like coffee, they shouldn't complain if they order a cappuccino and it tastes like coffee, right? :lol: :coffee:

Relevent for today

PostPosted: April 27th, 2008, 8:21 pm
by Kanakaberaka

PostPosted: May 15th, 2008, 11:46 am
by Mornche Geddick

PostPosted: May 16th, 2008, 4:42 am
by Coyote Goodfellow
THS, much more than Lewis's other books, touches on the subject of class: Hengist as an aristocrat, Studdock lacking either peasant shrewdness or aristocratic pride, the tramp being--like an aristocrat, a man of leisure. The working class girl who treats her jailed boyfriend as if he had a weakness not a moral failing to be lectured about.

Given how important class was to Orwell, I wish he had written what he thought about those bits. Maybe he just thought the aristocratic perspective was irrelevant and doomed to disappearance. He does seem to want a story completely different from the one Lewis wrote--something more like what he himself wrote in 1984. And I agree with Mornche Geddick that the barn meeting and "Beasts of England..." in Animal Farm are intimations of transcendence of the same sort he seems to be missing the point about in other people's works.

Incidentally--does it occur to anyone as interesting that while THS was being written Orwell was writing propaganda for the BBC--including things he realized were lies--which has some paralells to what Mark Studdock is doing in THS.

PostPosted: June 17th, 2008, 2:24 am
by blindlemonpie

PostPosted: July 29th, 2008, 3:57 am
by Dr. U
My son recently lent me a book of letters written by Tolkien, which is fascinating stuff (if you're crazy like we are). Anyway JRRT wrote some letters to friends discussing THS, and his take on it. Very interesting. He felt Charles Williams had gotten to have too much influence on CSL by the 3rd book, and it took on the flavor of one of Williams' novels, and, in his opinion, ruined the trilogy. I don't have time right now, but I'll see if I can find the exact quote and post it here later.

If you've ever read some of CW's novels, Tolkien's criticism has merit. CW's novels tend to be very strange, gothic stories, with cross-overs across different epochs and places, including Hell, often taking place. The lead characters tend to be mostly British academics, too, who spend a great deal of time Discussing Ideas. Sort of Masterpiece Theater meets Stephen King.

However, even if there's some truth in the idea of Williams' influence on the novel, THS is, IMO, still better than any of CW's novels. I really enjoy re-reading THS every few years, and I'm not even sure I can put into words all the reasons why I like the book so much. Certainly, Lewis created some unforgettable characters, including Mark Studdock, Frost, Withers and, of course, Merlin from Arthurian England.

BTW, years after reading a number of Williams' novels, I encountered his non-fiction work, Descent of the Dove. It's about the history of the Holy Spirit at work in the whole church, Catholic, Protestant and Orthodox, across the whole world over the past 2,000 years. I found it outstanding and full of insights. I personally wish he had written more books like that and less quirky novels. DOD is definitely worth tracking down.

PostPosted: November 13th, 2008, 8:53 pm
by archenland_knight

PostPosted: November 22nd, 2008, 11:48 am
by Mornche Geddick
I admire the CW novels, especially the later ones (Descent into Hell, All Hallow's Eve) They are difficult, but well worth the trouble and the influence on THS is unmistakable. The idea of the five Oyarses (Mercury through to Saturn) is similar to the ideas of the Archetypes in Place of the Lion and The Greater Trumps. But CW could do that sort of thing a lot better than Lewis.

1) CW introduces his supernatural entities as close to the start of the book as he can, and he makes sure the reader knows they are the centre of the plot. For example, in DiH Pauline's doppelganger is mentioned in the first chapter, only nineteen pages in and the rest of the chapter builds up to her climactic appearance. But Lewis is halfway through his book before we get any hints about the Oyarses.

2) CW doesn't waste pages on exposition and moralism, and the result is that his stories get moving a lot more quickly and his books are a lot shorter than THS.