Page 1 of 3

Suppressed by Jack

PostPosted: May 31st, 2009, 12:13 pm
by The Quangle Wangle
So what was the 'huge and complex episode' that C S Lewis omitted from Suprised by Joy?

Re: Suppressed by Jack

PostPosted: May 31st, 2009, 5:27 pm
by Sven
Mrs. Moore.

Re: Suppressed by Jack

PostPosted: June 1st, 2009, 11:43 am
by The Quangle Wangle
Is that definitely known to be the case?

Re: Suppressed by Jack

PostPosted: June 1st, 2009, 11:16 pm
by Leslie
It 's the only thing known about him that fits the description of "huge and complex" to that point in his life that he doesn't mention in SBJ, and the timing is right for where he mentions it in SBJ - just as he returned to Oxford after WWI, which is when Mrs. Moore and her daughter moved to Oxford from Bristol, and Lewis writes to Arthur Greeves about regularly spending each afternoon with the Moores. He also says in SBJ that through the missing episode his "earlier hostility to the emotions was very fully and variously avenged" -- so the love affair seems to fit the bill.

So unless someone can suggest another 'episode' that better fits the record, the Mrs Moore theory has to be the most plausible one.

Re: Suppressed by Jack

PostPosted: November 15th, 2009, 8:09 pm
by moordarjeeling
We might all try minding our own business.

Re: Suppressed by Jack

PostPosted: November 18th, 2009, 8:59 pm
by larry gilman
Eh? You mean, read no biographies and no letters collections? Or only those that contain nothing that their subjects would not have confessed through a megaphone from a rooftop? It's one possible policy, I suppose . . .

Re: Suppressed by Jack

PostPosted: November 19th, 2009, 4:08 am
by rusmeister
Mordarjeeling is absolutely right.
She is talking about the primarily prurient interest in uncovering details about an alleged sin of Lewis's. I don't think she means "read no biographies or letters". But if those letters were actually intended to be private, and not shared (particularly information of an intimate nature), then what about the admonition to not read other people's mail? Would we want people airing foolish and hurtful sins, sexual or otherwise; IOW, do unto others...? Do not we all wish that our sins would really be taken away and remembered no more?

Of course, CS Lewis was a sinner. But I am the chief of sinners, and when it comes to examining sins, I should, generally speaking, stick to my own.

"Lord, have mercy on me, a sinner!" should be our prayer when we even hear about things like this.

Re: Suppressed by Jack

PostPosted: November 19th, 2009, 6:56 am
by moordarjeeling
What did Lewis himself say about such poking into authors' private lives?

On the one hand, that was in another century, and most of its people are dead. Far on that hand, I haven't heard that Lewis disapproved looking for the historical Beatrice or the Dark Lady.

On the other hand, in _The Personal Heresy_ and _The Poison of Subjectivism_ Lewis rejects the notion that literature is about the writer's personality and/or personal life. So there goes that possible justification for poking around in case the secret should turn out useful in criticism.

Re: Suppressed by Jack

PostPosted: November 19th, 2009, 7:23 am
by moordarjeeling

Re: Suppressed by Jack

PostPosted: November 19th, 2009, 3:57 pm
by larry gilman

Re: Suppressed by Jack

PostPosted: November 19th, 2009, 4:13 pm
by Leslie

Re: Suppressed by Jack

PostPosted: November 19th, 2009, 4:34 pm
by larry gilman

Re: Suppressed by Jack

PostPosted: November 19th, 2009, 6:18 pm
by rusmeister

Re: Suppressed by Jack

PostPosted: November 19th, 2009, 6:26 pm
by Leslie
replaced by post below

Re: Suppressed by Jack

PostPosted: November 19th, 2009, 7:18 pm
by Leslie
Larry, as I look back I see that I did present a very muddled argument. I had three things going on in my head:

1. The 'non-sexual theory' does not negate the 'Mrs Moore' answer to the original question of this thread.

2. If the sexual relationship ceased when Lewis became a Christian, then 'liar' and 'fornicator' apply only to his non-Christian period, and need not detract from the integrity of his Christian writings.

3. If moordarjeeling finds the sexual theory too jarring for his or her sensibilities, there are other theories that permit Lewis to be 'in love' with Mrs Moore, as he stated in his letters, without sex. So I was trying to give him or her something to cling to. But I shouldn't have called the sexual theory 'jumping to a conclusion'.