Perelandra might be the weak sister of the three... it had some good parts and insights, but I found myself just getting through it. I haven't reread it like I have THS, so it might have just been the mood I was in at the time. Overall though, Out of the Silent Planet and Perelandra feel like they could have just been the first 10-12 chapters of THS, and maybe were planned to be or something.
It is a bit interesting that 1984 and Brave New World are so much better known than That Hideous Strength, given how well known Lewis is for his other work. My guess would be that the combination of casting shade on the elite and academics with more obvious Christian overtones tended to get him sidelined a bit when it came to the later half of the 20th century's academics. That, and the success of the Chronicles of Narnia might have pigeon holed him in many people's minds a child's author.
I've read 1984 and Brave New World several times each, but somehow That Hideous Strength escaped my notice until just a year or so ago. I found it shocking in how precisely Lewis described the modern condition, the insidious nature of materialist evil, the seduction of the weak-willed into the Venus fly trap of, well, evil, and how once one has been snared it becomes almost impossible to avoid getting drawn further in, becoming so morally compromised that one can no longer escape.
Of course, the key difference between THS and the other works, aside from Lewis' much greater level of psychological insight (or maybe because of that) is that, as a Christian, Lewis could see a way out. Redemption required a miracle but a miracle was not impossible.
As an aside, I also found it fascinating how he reconciled Christianity and paganism - the gods were basically angels. I've had the same thought myself many times, and it seems a straightforward way of finding concordance between the newest and oldest spiritual traditions of our ancestors.
Yea, Lewis was something else, almost in his own league of writers. It is still a little hard for me to reconcile him as the writer of The Chronicles of Narnia, That Hideous Strength, The Screwtape Letters, Till We have Faces,... the other one about people in Hell with the title that escapes me... There is overlap in all his works, but it is the overlap of a sunflower's petals that cover a massive area of the human condition all together and in different ways.
Yet in a way, one of my favorite thing about his philosophical writing, along with Adam Smith and Tolkien's work, is the message that it is ok to have a small life instead of some grandiose, reach for the stars kind of success that society pushes. That there is dignity, pride and real value in tending your garden. I think a lot of the madness we see today stems from 50 years of telling people over and over they need to change the world, End World _____, do all this incredible stuff that is doomed to failure, cursing them with ambition, unable to appreciate building a better world in the areas you can actually touch.
Anyway, assuming I didn't have an aneurism there I should have part 2 done today. Maybe a part 3? Not sure when or if I am going to hit the size limit again.
It's no accident that Tolkien and Lewis were close friends. They had a very similar way of seeing the world. Both possessed greater depth by far than your standard writer of weird tales - and I've read a lot of the latter.
THS really is criminally underrated, though. It should be required reading.
Excellent article!!! I confess, I've only ever read part of each of these. I should change that, but it feels kind of heavy reading given the similarities to today. What made you find it comforting, I am curious?
I think Orwell is comforting because in a sense he gets it, it being that feeling of constantly watching what you say around people, always self censoring and looking over your own shoulder. You have no doubt noticed my internal filter is rather... porous... self policing is a bit difficult for me, particularly because I want to pick apart everything and see how it works and debate with people. There's a bit of sympathy with Winston Smith as he deals with similar problems, only turned up to 11, and even manages to carve out a little happiness in the hellscape of his world. Sure, it all ends in torture and horror, but it is still nice to read something and think "Yea, this guy's been there too." Even if where he'd been had a lot more getting hunted by communists who wanted to kill him than my day to day life :D
1984 is also a little comforting just because it isn't quite that bad yet. Getting there maybe, but shit can get worse. I mean, unfortunately it did get worse in many places, but not this place yet, so there's still hope.
I will say, one good thing about That Hideous Strength is that it doesn't really get that heavy. You never quite get a point where you are thinking "I don't know if I even want to find out what happens." Part of that is probably the intermixing of Mark and Jane's stories, and Jane has a nicer time of it. Plus you see the opposition to all the evil starting to build, and so it isn't so bleak as 1984. Mark himself also has his redemptive arc throughout, so even there is a light of hope in the darkness. Plus there is sort of a "Wait.. what's going to happen?" point towards the last 3rd that takes some of the pressure off.
Still, there are points where it is definitely a bit uncomfortably close to home. I think a somewhat less talented writer could have driven the story into just being too bleak, but Lewis has a lot of faith in humanity.
Knowing you as I do, I would recommend finishing the Space Trilogy first; I don't think you would find it depressing or too miserable at all, and it would probably speak to you a little more than me even, seeing as how you are a bit more religious and all. It's happy ending is somewhat dimmed by my wondering "Well, what the hell do we do if there aren't space angels?!"
The last third to a half of 1984 is a bit of a gut punch. Suffice to say, it doesn't end well for our characters, or humanity in general. A few days after reading it one might feel energized to fight tyranny, but honestly one can equally come away thinking "Man... I hope I die fighting the tyranny and never have to live through it."
Sorry, I started writing a reply on my phone at work, then got side tracked and forgot.
Thank you for that link! I had been wondering if Orwell ever read THS, and in fact he wrote a whole review!
I actually like Orwell's review a bit better than Wright's review of Orwell. (I am going to reread Wright's, however, as I was kind of multitasking it.) I think the ending of THS, or at least the big resolution, is the weakest part. Throwing a whole lot of magic at the problem of NICE is sort of non-satisfying, if only because it rather says "Hey, this big problem that we see mirrored in real life? Yea, I am not going to suggest anyway to actually deal with that other than 'I hope the angels sort it.'"
Maybe Lewis didn't know how to solve it, which is fair because its a big problem, and only could recommend not letting things get that far, but I still think he could do better. Maybe have the good and bad angels fight, thus letting the good humans deal with bad humans (back to having two levels of power, but each level sticks to its own). Or have the bad guys totally win, only to be swatted down by the angels, emphasizing the whole "You are probably screwed if you don't stop this thing earlier yourselves, if you don't believe in angels" angle but still having a happy ending. As it stands, it seems to hint that complacency is fine if you have enough faith. Part 3 is going to look at this a little more, after I reread the final chapters yet again.
Still, I think Orwell is quite correct that if you are not religious, some aspects of the book are going to fall a little flat, and even if you are the end has a bit of a deus ex machina feel. Orwell is also quite correct that it is a very good book, even if some people are going to find the supernatural stuff the weak point.
Lewis, and Wright, both being Catholics obviously colors their view of the situation, since divine intervention is a part of that worldview. Wright isn't joking when he says he believes in miracles, and I have the impression the same was true of Lewis. So, a miraculous ending to THS is really quite consistent with their framework; it's only unsatisfying if you don't share a belief in the numinous.
Notably, neither Orwell nor Huxley, both atheists, were able to articulate a resolution, either.
THS is obviously showing a two-level conflict. Both angels and demons are working through human proxies. The magic mostly comes in at the very subtle level of inspiration, whether of the corruptive or redemptive variety. Of course things get a bit more pyrotechnic at the end, but ultimately the interpenetrative nature of spiritual and base reality is, I think, very much to the point of the story.
Oh, Wright isn't joking, that is for certain... In fact I am not certain he can even conceive that people might believe in a less supernatural world, much less see things from their point of view. (I will review his review later.)
The two level conflict is there, but the second level, that of the angels, is really quiet and subtle throughout the book. Subtle to the point that if you were to rewrite it a bit to say Alcasan's head was just spouting madness GP3 style, and the very inner ring was just a cult worshipping nothing but their own madness, it would hardly change the story's plot. The meaning, yes a bit, but the plot could continue with nothing changed. The dark angels don't really lend them any particular support, even indirectly. That's sort of the problem with how the good guys win at the end entirely through the second level intervention: there is no comparable bad guy second level intervention that seems to require it. It leaves me wondering why the good guys really needed that intervention to begin with. Is Lewis saying there is no hope at all without the angels stepping in, and it would have gone all 1984 without it? I can imagine a few ways the good guys could have solved things without angelic intervention that would suggest ways regular people could approach the problem. Most don't even involve hiring a bunch of Pinkertons to gun down the place as Wright suggests. Although one might be tempted to say "Yes! Man is doomed to the evil of men, but angels step in and fix it!" one wonders why the angels didn't seem to step in with regards to the USSR, or Nazi Germany. Maybe China and Cambodia were not sufficiently Christian to justify it, but Germany and Russia in the early 20th century were that much less Christian than Britain?
There is also a way the story could have ended with the good angels fighting the bad angels, leaving the bad guys in chaos and destroying themselves to the point that the good guys can step up. That uses the two levels well, as the upper level doesn't take care of everything for the lower level, but keeps the playing field empty until it can be leveled.
Wright brings up the Merlin subplot, as though that is key to the story and without the magic aspect it doesn't work, but the Merlin subplot is absolutely irrelevant, just the deus to ex machina later. He makes a nice conversation piece to talk about old school religion vs new school, fine, but there is no tension about whether he will join their side, with characters having to convince him through reason why they are the good guys. They play a word game, and he's on board. He becomes the sacrifice, but since we have known him for about 30 seconds, and he doesn't even live in the world till woken up, who cares? Merlin could just as well have been any character to makes a heroic sacrifice and it would have worked as well or better. He is just a reference McGuffin. "Remember this guy? Yea, he's here to save the day! Better not let the enemy get him first!" Was there any danger of that happening? Not really...
That all isn't to say it is bad, but it isn't very strong.
I do think some of the magic was useful to the plot. Jane's visions are a great driver for the story, explaining "Why are these two normies important?", getting her where she needs to go, adding some tension and sense of danger to her early on, and then serving as clues to what they need to do. Ransom himself not going super saiyan and just ending the NICE or becoming king or whatever was a good move as well, because that makes all the other character's journey's kind of unnecessary for the bigger arc.)
Anyway, I intend to write a longer review of the review, after part 3 of the current comparison.
Thank you sir!
Perelandra might be the weak sister of the three... it had some good parts and insights, but I found myself just getting through it. I haven't reread it like I have THS, so it might have just been the mood I was in at the time. Overall though, Out of the Silent Planet and Perelandra feel like they could have just been the first 10-12 chapters of THS, and maybe were planned to be or something.
It is a bit interesting that 1984 and Brave New World are so much better known than That Hideous Strength, given how well known Lewis is for his other work. My guess would be that the combination of casting shade on the elite and academics with more obvious Christian overtones tended to get him sidelined a bit when it came to the later half of the 20th century's academics. That, and the success of the Chronicles of Narnia might have pigeon holed him in many people's minds a child's author.
I've read 1984 and Brave New World several times each, but somehow That Hideous Strength escaped my notice until just a year or so ago. I found it shocking in how precisely Lewis described the modern condition, the insidious nature of materialist evil, the seduction of the weak-willed into the Venus fly trap of, well, evil, and how once one has been snared it becomes almost impossible to avoid getting drawn further in, becoming so morally compromised that one can no longer escape.
Of course, the key difference between THS and the other works, aside from Lewis' much greater level of psychological insight (or maybe because of that) is that, as a Christian, Lewis could see a way out. Redemption required a miracle but a miracle was not impossible.
As an aside, I also found it fascinating how he reconciled Christianity and paganism - the gods were basically angels. I've had the same thought myself many times, and it seems a straightforward way of finding concordance between the newest and oldest spiritual traditions of our ancestors.
Yea, Lewis was something else, almost in his own league of writers. It is still a little hard for me to reconcile him as the writer of The Chronicles of Narnia, That Hideous Strength, The Screwtape Letters, Till We have Faces,... the other one about people in Hell with the title that escapes me... There is overlap in all his works, but it is the overlap of a sunflower's petals that cover a massive area of the human condition all together and in different ways.
Yet in a way, one of my favorite thing about his philosophical writing, along with Adam Smith and Tolkien's work, is the message that it is ok to have a small life instead of some grandiose, reach for the stars kind of success that society pushes. That there is dignity, pride and real value in tending your garden. I think a lot of the madness we see today stems from 50 years of telling people over and over they need to change the world, End World _____, do all this incredible stuff that is doomed to failure, cursing them with ambition, unable to appreciate building a better world in the areas you can actually touch.
Anyway, assuming I didn't have an aneurism there I should have part 2 done today. Maybe a part 3? Not sure when or if I am going to hit the size limit again.
It's no accident that Tolkien and Lewis were close friends. They had a very similar way of seeing the world. Both possessed greater depth by far than your standard writer of weird tales - and I've read a lot of the latter.
THS really is criminally underrated, though. It should be required reading.
Excellent article!!! I confess, I've only ever read part of each of these. I should change that, but it feels kind of heavy reading given the similarities to today. What made you find it comforting, I am curious?
I think Orwell is comforting because in a sense he gets it, it being that feeling of constantly watching what you say around people, always self censoring and looking over your own shoulder. You have no doubt noticed my internal filter is rather... porous... self policing is a bit difficult for me, particularly because I want to pick apart everything and see how it works and debate with people. There's a bit of sympathy with Winston Smith as he deals with similar problems, only turned up to 11, and even manages to carve out a little happiness in the hellscape of his world. Sure, it all ends in torture and horror, but it is still nice to read something and think "Yea, this guy's been there too." Even if where he'd been had a lot more getting hunted by communists who wanted to kill him than my day to day life :D
1984 is also a little comforting just because it isn't quite that bad yet. Getting there maybe, but shit can get worse. I mean, unfortunately it did get worse in many places, but not this place yet, so there's still hope.
I will say, one good thing about That Hideous Strength is that it doesn't really get that heavy. You never quite get a point where you are thinking "I don't know if I even want to find out what happens." Part of that is probably the intermixing of Mark and Jane's stories, and Jane has a nicer time of it. Plus you see the opposition to all the evil starting to build, and so it isn't so bleak as 1984. Mark himself also has his redemptive arc throughout, so even there is a light of hope in the darkness. Plus there is sort of a "Wait.. what's going to happen?" point towards the last 3rd that takes some of the pressure off.
Still, there are points where it is definitely a bit uncomfortably close to home. I think a somewhat less talented writer could have driven the story into just being too bleak, but Lewis has a lot of faith in humanity.
Knowing you as I do, I would recommend finishing the Space Trilogy first; I don't think you would find it depressing or too miserable at all, and it would probably speak to you a little more than me even, seeing as how you are a bit more religious and all. It's happy ending is somewhat dimmed by my wondering "Well, what the hell do we do if there aren't space angels?!"
The last third to a half of 1984 is a bit of a gut punch. Suffice to say, it doesn't end well for our characters, or humanity in general. A few days after reading it one might feel energized to fight tyranny, but honestly one can equally come away thinking "Man... I hope I die fighting the tyranny and never have to live through it."
Thank you for the fantastic reply : ). As always, I love seeing your reasoning! Going to read the second half of your article now : )
Very relevant:
https://www.scifiwright.com/2022/06/orwell-and-lewis-2/
Sorry, I started writing a reply on my phone at work, then got side tracked and forgot.
Thank you for that link! I had been wondering if Orwell ever read THS, and in fact he wrote a whole review!
I actually like Orwell's review a bit better than Wright's review of Orwell. (I am going to reread Wright's, however, as I was kind of multitasking it.) I think the ending of THS, or at least the big resolution, is the weakest part. Throwing a whole lot of magic at the problem of NICE is sort of non-satisfying, if only because it rather says "Hey, this big problem that we see mirrored in real life? Yea, I am not going to suggest anyway to actually deal with that other than 'I hope the angels sort it.'"
Maybe Lewis didn't know how to solve it, which is fair because its a big problem, and only could recommend not letting things get that far, but I still think he could do better. Maybe have the good and bad angels fight, thus letting the good humans deal with bad humans (back to having two levels of power, but each level sticks to its own). Or have the bad guys totally win, only to be swatted down by the angels, emphasizing the whole "You are probably screwed if you don't stop this thing earlier yourselves, if you don't believe in angels" angle but still having a happy ending. As it stands, it seems to hint that complacency is fine if you have enough faith. Part 3 is going to look at this a little more, after I reread the final chapters yet again.
Still, I think Orwell is quite correct that if you are not religious, some aspects of the book are going to fall a little flat, and even if you are the end has a bit of a deus ex machina feel. Orwell is also quite correct that it is a very good book, even if some people are going to find the supernatural stuff the weak point.
Lewis, and Wright, both being Catholics obviously colors their view of the situation, since divine intervention is a part of that worldview. Wright isn't joking when he says he believes in miracles, and I have the impression the same was true of Lewis. So, a miraculous ending to THS is really quite consistent with their framework; it's only unsatisfying if you don't share a belief in the numinous.
Notably, neither Orwell nor Huxley, both atheists, were able to articulate a resolution, either.
THS is obviously showing a two-level conflict. Both angels and demons are working through human proxies. The magic mostly comes in at the very subtle level of inspiration, whether of the corruptive or redemptive variety. Of course things get a bit more pyrotechnic at the end, but ultimately the interpenetrative nature of spiritual and base reality is, I think, very much to the point of the story.
Oh, Wright isn't joking, that is for certain... In fact I am not certain he can even conceive that people might believe in a less supernatural world, much less see things from their point of view. (I will review his review later.)
The two level conflict is there, but the second level, that of the angels, is really quiet and subtle throughout the book. Subtle to the point that if you were to rewrite it a bit to say Alcasan's head was just spouting madness GP3 style, and the very inner ring was just a cult worshipping nothing but their own madness, it would hardly change the story's plot. The meaning, yes a bit, but the plot could continue with nothing changed. The dark angels don't really lend them any particular support, even indirectly. That's sort of the problem with how the good guys win at the end entirely through the second level intervention: there is no comparable bad guy second level intervention that seems to require it. It leaves me wondering why the good guys really needed that intervention to begin with. Is Lewis saying there is no hope at all without the angels stepping in, and it would have gone all 1984 without it? I can imagine a few ways the good guys could have solved things without angelic intervention that would suggest ways regular people could approach the problem. Most don't even involve hiring a bunch of Pinkertons to gun down the place as Wright suggests. Although one might be tempted to say "Yes! Man is doomed to the evil of men, but angels step in and fix it!" one wonders why the angels didn't seem to step in with regards to the USSR, or Nazi Germany. Maybe China and Cambodia were not sufficiently Christian to justify it, but Germany and Russia in the early 20th century were that much less Christian than Britain?
There is also a way the story could have ended with the good angels fighting the bad angels, leaving the bad guys in chaos and destroying themselves to the point that the good guys can step up. That uses the two levels well, as the upper level doesn't take care of everything for the lower level, but keeps the playing field empty until it can be leveled.
Wright brings up the Merlin subplot, as though that is key to the story and without the magic aspect it doesn't work, but the Merlin subplot is absolutely irrelevant, just the deus to ex machina later. He makes a nice conversation piece to talk about old school religion vs new school, fine, but there is no tension about whether he will join their side, with characters having to convince him through reason why they are the good guys. They play a word game, and he's on board. He becomes the sacrifice, but since we have known him for about 30 seconds, and he doesn't even live in the world till woken up, who cares? Merlin could just as well have been any character to makes a heroic sacrifice and it would have worked as well or better. He is just a reference McGuffin. "Remember this guy? Yea, he's here to save the day! Better not let the enemy get him first!" Was there any danger of that happening? Not really...
That all isn't to say it is bad, but it isn't very strong.
I do think some of the magic was useful to the plot. Jane's visions are a great driver for the story, explaining "Why are these two normies important?", getting her where she needs to go, adding some tension and sense of danger to her early on, and then serving as clues to what they need to do. Ransom himself not going super saiyan and just ending the NICE or becoming king or whatever was a good move as well, because that makes all the other character's journey's kind of unnecessary for the bigger arc.)
Anyway, I intend to write a longer review of the review, after part 3 of the current comparison.
Kelo was a travesty, a sham, and a mockery. A traveshamockery!