Page 3 of 3

PostPosted: March 23rd, 2007, 5:44 pm
by jo
Well I tend to think that, in the absence of overwhelming evidence to the contrary - and none of the evidence I have seen convinces me that Lewis did NOT write TDT - we should err on the side of courtesy and not call an elderly priest a liar :(

PostPosted: March 24th, 2007, 10:30 am
by kbrowne

PostPosted: March 24th, 2007, 11:44 am
by carol
I don't believe a man simply because he is an elderly priest.

He was once a young man who was visiting Lewis for a few weeks, planned to return to be his secretary, and was unable to because Lewis died.
This same young man shortly afterwards claimed to have known Lewis personally for an extended time, but it was only about a month.

This is the basis on which this gentleman established his work as editor. He has certainly done a lot of hard work, and knows more about Lewis' writings than I do. I am aware that I trust some of his work for comments and information I give others about Lewis' material.

I do not know where he got the TDT MS and/or typescript, but I have not been satisfied with the explanations given.

Larry, thank you for the further information. My guess is that we will never
know the truth.

PostPosted: March 24th, 2007, 2:40 pm
by jo
Well unless Hooper really did forge it and makes some sort of deathbed confession. But I don't believe he did. When I read the book I was struck several times with things in it that were reminiscent of stuff in other Lewis books (I've lent my copy to someone but I can get it back and read it again and make notes if you like).

Re: TDT vindicated? Not so fast!

PostPosted: January 7th, 2008, 3:32 am
by moordarjeeling

Lewis: re-writing of things begun and abandoned years earlie

PostPosted: January 7th, 2008, 3:40 am
by moordarjeeling

PostPosted: January 27th, 2008, 2:42 pm
by Paul_Burgin