Category Archives: C.S. Lewis

C.S. Lewis, Engineering

Exhausted after a long week; the end is not yet

Leave a comment

I was planning on writing a serious post tonight, but I haven’t the gray cells left to do so. I put in about 75 hours this week at the office. My timesheet says 72.5, but I didn’t count every hour. And the end is not yet. I spent a good chunk of my time there today finding out that what I did yesterday was only partly correct, and finding the way to make it fully correct. And writing the engineering report to demonstrate that it was correct. This is fixing a problem that occurred in one of our projects in 2002. This week I spent 20 hours on that, and the end is not yet. That’s 20 hours I didn’t get to spend finishing my Bentonville floodplain project or making a sizable dent in the work to do on my first of two Rogers floodplain projects.

I got home tonight about 9 PM, after eating supper with my mother-in-law. I read, or rather re-read, the C.S. Lewis essay “Christianity and Literature”. I posted before on a quote from this essay. I suppose it’s never a good thing to try to read C.S. Lewis when you’re brain dead. I finished the seven page essay (smallish font), but got little out of it. I shall have to read it again. Maybe several times for what he’s trying to say to sink in and properly edify.

I’m really tired. Years ago I posted about Emerson’s statement “There is time enough for all that I must do.” I’m starting to think Emerson was wrong. Until I can get over this hump at work, I know he’s wrong. Today I barely made any progress getting over the hump. And I drove home thinking of all those “piles of work not done,” and I remembered two or three e-mails I planned on sending today, but didn’t for concentrating on that 2002 project. I guess I’ll have to get started a little early on Monday, for the contractor needs one of those e-mails first thing Monday morning.

So what shall I quote to end this post? “The end is not yet,” or “There is time enough for all that I must do”? I suppose both could be true. Oh, wait, I’m supposed to teach adult Life Group tomorrow and I haven’t begun to prepare. Oh, and the announcement is going to be in the church bulliten tomorrow, about people contacting me if they are interested in a church writing group. Sigh.

C.S. Lewis, Writing

A Writer’s Nugget from C.S. Lewis

Leave a comment

I’m not talking about something he wrote, say some fiction or non-fiction, that was especially good intrinsically for writing’s sake. No, in a lecture he made a statement that is of considerable worth for writers. Here it is.

What are the key-words of modern criticism? Creative, with its opposite derivative; spontaneity, with its opposite convention; freedom, contrasted with rules. Great authors are innovators, pioneers, explorers; bad authors bunch in schools and follow models. Or again, great authors are always ‘breaking fetters’ and ‘bursting bonds’. They have personality, they ‘are themselves’.

This comes from the lecture titled “Christianity and Literature”, which was read to a religious society in Oxford. It was originally published in Rehabilitations and Other Essays (Oxford 1939). I have it in a book titled The Timeless Writings of C.S. Lewis, which is a recent reprinting of some collected lectures and articles by Lewis published in separate volumes.

I find Lewis’ words to be particularly insightful, instructing, and inspiring for an aspiring author, one who is planning to write secular works with a Christian worldview underpinning them. It is not convention that marks the great author, but spontaneity; not works patterned after someone else’s but creativity, perhaps also or better stated as originality. Great authors should break fetters and burst bonds.

This is something I must look at in my own writings. Am I bursting bonds, breaking fetters? Seeking not to bunch in a school but rather be an innovator, a pioneer, an explorer? I sort of think so, because I haven’t really sought to pattern my work after anyone, and, perhaps, my lack of learning in the great literature that preceded me means I don’t know a whole lot about those who I might pattern after.

True, as much as I love Robert Frost a lot of my poetry sounds Frostian. On-line critics have said as much, always in a good way. As to the mechanics of my prose, so far no one has said “You sound like ———.” The ideas I have for novels don’t seem to easily fall into genres. The Alfred Cottage Mysteries are almost cozy mysteries–except they won’t always involve a murder, and Alfred, while an amateur detective, will be solving crimes of years past, not of the present.
Documenting America is neither history nor politics, but rather a mix, and I think unlike anything I’ve seen before. Will it sell? We’ll soon see.

At writers conferences and on writer/agent blogs I keep seeing advice such as: follow the genre rules. Lewis would say “Innovate. Break the fetters of genre. Be spontaneous.”

I’m going to be thinking long and hard about this advice from Lewis. Well, he wasn’t purposefully giving advice for writers. He was defining what he thought were the characteristics of great writers. I think I’ll have more to say about this over the coming days.

book reviews, C.S. Lewis

Book Review: On The Incarnation

Leave a comment

As I wrote in this post, C.S. Lewis advised us that the ancient books are not only for professionals. They can be understood by the modern reader, and “first-hand knowledge [from the ancient books] is not only more worth acquiring than second-hand knowledge, but it is usually much easier and more delightful to acquire.”
So Lewis wrote in the Introduction to On The Incarnation: The Treatise De Incarnatione Verbi Dei, by Saint Athanasius [St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, my copy is from 2002, ISBN 0-913836-40-0]. This Christian classic was written around 318 AD, when Athanasius was only 21 to 23 years old. I found it while foraging in a thrift store; it cost me either 25 or 50 cents. I bought it because I had reviewed a seminary paper my son-in-law wrote about De Incarnatione Verbi Dei [DIVD], and decided, years after reading the paper, that maybe I should read the source material. Little did I know that C.S. Lewis was about to tell me I was doing exactly the right thing.

 

DIVD was Athanasius’ second major work, after Against the Heathens [Contra Gentes]. At that time Christianity was in search of orthodoxy. Constantine had recently converted to Christianity and brought the whole empire with him. The persecutions were over, but a greater calamity was about to befall the Church Universal: the influx of government influence, including huge numbers of new “converts” by virtue of the emperor’s conversion, who had no background and no grounding in the faith. The Council of Nicaea would take place in 325 AD, and orthodoxy would be defined. How much of a role would this book play? Was it written…well, why was it written, and what does it tell us?

 

In the prefatory “Life of Athanasius, a scant eight pages long, the editors says DIVD “sets forth the positive content of the Christian faith, as [Athanasius] has himself receive it. …It is not speculative, it is not original; …it is not even controversial…it is a statement of traditional faith…, there is…nothing of Athanasius in it….” This may be true, but I cannot say so after one reading of DIVD and without reading many of it’s antecedents.

 

What I can say is that the book is worth reading, though it is not an easy read, even in this modern translation. During the first three chapters I often found myself glossing over the text, reaching a stopping point and having little or no retention of what I had read. The fault is mine, not the book’s. I believe I could re-read these pages now and grasp the meaning. The gist of Athanasius’ argument: God had a dilemma in that mankind failed to relate to God, his creator, as God intended; God addressed (or solved) the problem by coming to man in the form of a man, Jesus Christ. Jesus was God, separate from the Father yet part of the Father—a mystery.

 

The later chapters were more understandable, especially those on Christ’s death and resurrection. Athanasius’ discussion on how this changes man’s relation to death was excellent. I found many parallels to John Wesley’s sermons on death. Might DIVD have been a direct source for Wesley? Or was the notion of death having been conquered by Christ and as a consequence man’s facing down death so common that the language and concepts couldn’t be anything but similar, even in works fourteen centuries apart? I’m not sure.

 

The later chapters, in which Athanasius refutes objections to the Incarnation, and the entire Christian faith, was less beneficial for doctrine but perhaps was so for history. It gives us a window into what opposing groups of the 4th Century were saying about Christianity. Appended to the book is a long letter Athanasius wrote to Marcellinus, about the Psalms. This too gives us insight into the era, and how Christians viewed and used the Psalms at that time.

 

I will re-read this book. Perhaps not right away, but soon. I’ll like go through one other book on my reading pile than come back to this. I think full understanding is not beyond my grasp. I may have understood it better than I think. It is foundational to the Christian faith by one of its giants. Many others have written on the same subject, including modern works of incredible scholarship, but I’m with C.S. Lewis on this one. Read the original if you find it.
C.S. Lewis, Emerson, reading, Writing

New Books or Old Books

Leave a comment

Each age, it is found, must write its own books; or rather, each generation for the next succeeding. The books of an older period will not fit this. Ralph Waldo Emerson, “The American Scholar” 1837

Naturally, since I myself am a writer, I do not wish the ordinary reader to read no modern books. But if he must read only the new or only the old, I would advise him to read the old. C.S. Lewis, Introduction to On the Incarnation by St. Athanasius, 1944

So, two eminent scholars seem to disagree! Why am I not surprised. Emerson says read the modern books. The generation right before you, after they observed the world and digested it, shared the knowledge they had for my generation. C.S. Lewis says not so; read first the old books, then if you have time and inclination read the modern as well.

This came up because, at my last foraging in a thrift store, I found the Athanasius book. I might not have bothered with it except I have an interest in the early Christian writings, and thought this slim paperback would be a welcome addition to my reference library. Also, in 2005 I first read a seminary paper by my son-in-law on Athanasius’ de Incarnatione Verbi Dei. I didn’t understand it, put it down, picked it up again almost exactly a year later, didn’t understand it, put it down again, etc., until finally I was able to glean enough from it to understand it (I think) the discussion and write a review. When I saw the book I thought, “I’ve read about this writing of Athanasius; now I have the chance to read it in modern translation.”

When I got it home I read the Introduction. C.S. Lewis’ words stood in stark contract to what I remembered reading in Emerson. “The American Scholar” is actually the only essay of RWE’s I’ve gotten all the way through. Others I’ve picked up and put down, but that one I really liked. Emerson’s words had seemed true to me. That’s why every American generation writes another biography or two of George Washington, and why the shelves of our local libraries are constantly rotating books, selling off those more than fifty years old and replacing them with newer distillations of the same subject.

Lewis has more to say about this than does Emerson. He goes on to discuss the importance of reading the original sources. Commentaries on Plato are more confusing than Plato, he writes. Just read Plato. He’s not so hard to understand in modern translation. Since that is exactly what I am attempting to do with the Athanasius book, I could understand Lewis’ remarks. And, as a writer I’d better figure out how to write materials for the next generation while at the same time directing them to the old books.

We’ll see how this goes. I’ve read about fifteen of the 95 pages of Athanasius, and sort of understand what he’s saying. I haven’t gotten to the meat of his argument yet. Of course, when he began by saying, “In our former book”, I had to divert to various on-line sources to see what that book was and what it is all about. That led me to some letters he wrote. That led me to some biographical materials, and even a compilation of his works. The tentacles of research are at work.

It is taking me much concentration to read De Inarnatione. I can’t do it while also watching television, or even while that noise is on in the house. I can’t read it if I’m also thinking of articles to write or blog posts to post or bills to pay or work issues the morning will bring. So I may not finish it quickly, may even put it aside and go to some other book in my reading pile. We shall see. The experiment is on.

C.S. Lewis, critique group, Fifty Thousand Screaming People, Life Group lessons, reading, Screwtape's Good Advice, Writing

The July Report

Leave a comment

This was my first month for posting goals, so this report will be specific as to how I did on those goals. I’m posting this on the 30th because the 31st, right now, looks to be a day I won’t have time to post on.

Here are the goals I set on July 1st, and what I did toward them.

  • Type final edits on The Screwtape Letters study guide proposal; mail to the editor by July 3. I’m happy to say I accomplished this, mailing the proposal on July 2. Still waiting for an answer.
  • Complete proposal on In Front of Fifty Thousand Screaming People; edit; mail to agent by July 10. This will include work on the first 30 pages of the book, which are to be included. I finished this, but not until last night, July 29, a few minutes before midnight Central Time. While I wish I had finished it sooner, I think the extra time I took made both the proposal and the sample chapters better. Now the waiting begins.
  • Begin work on proposal on the Elijah and Elisha small group study guide. By the end of the month I would like to see the proposal essentially complete, and the weekly study sheets I prepared for Life Group expanded into chapters. If I can have it ready to mail to the editor by then, fine, but I’ll be satisfied mailing it in August. Alas, I did NOT finish this, and barely began it. I started looking at it only yesterday, and accomplished very little. This one will take some work, as I have to convert two page student handouts into sample chapters.
  • Attend critique group twice. At the first one present the synopsis for In Front of Fifty Thousand Screaming People; at the second present the concept for the Documenting America newspaper column, including marketing letter and one or two sample columns. I attended both critique group sessions, but at the second one, rather than taking “Documenting America” I opted for two more chapters of FTSP. Given that no one had seen these, I thought it best someone critique them before I turned them in with the proposal.
  • Finish organizing the scattered piles of paper about the house. Actually, I’d be satisfied to simply bring improved organization to this, even if I don’t finish it. At least I want to have all papers of all works in progress filed together, and drafts of all poems put in their assigned places. I did mostly accomplish this. Many, many things are in a proper place, logically filed and easily retrievable. I have some more to go, especially the poetry, but I feel much better about this. I can let the rest slide a month while I work on other things.
  • Organize the business end of writing, including establishing a mileage log so I can get rid of the scraps. As with the last item, this is mostly accomplished. I probably have 20 percent yet to be finished.
  • Continue to post to this blog, at least 10 posts this month, and preferably 15 to 18. Yes! I have been faithful to this blog, reaching my goal for posts–and none of them fluff posts, either.
  • Begin outlining the next life group lesson I’ll teach, and prepare it in a way it can become a small group study guide. I did this, and have the lesson series mostly planned (but not studied or written). However, based on what the class chose to do as the next lesson to be taught by the other teacher, I will have to choose another topic. I chose it, and began planning it. I’m not as far along as I’d like, but I have a good start.

Miscellaneous items accomplished include: reading for research and pleasure (but, as I learn more and more, a writer never reads only for pleasure); reading about ten blogs of writers, agents, or editors; a few poem critiques on Absolute Write; reading about promotion for writers.

So, all in all a productive, satisfying month for writing.

book reviews, C.S. Lewis

Book Review: THE SCREWTAPE LETTERS

1 Comment

I first read The Screwtape Letters by C.S. Lewis in 1975, and kept the small paperback copy I had of it until my daughter ran off with it (since returned). As a young man just starting my Christian walk, this book had a profound effect on me. Still, the years gave no opportunity for me to read it again until recently. I suggested to the co-teacher of our adult Sunday School class that this would be a good book to study. I found a study guide from Progeny Press, and we began the study last October, finishing up just today. While C.S. Lewis is sometimes very dense in his writing, everyone today said they were glad we did the study, that they got much out of it.

Now, much further into my Christian life, The Screwtape Letters has once again had a profound effect on me. I love the way Lewis puts himself into the voice of one of Satan’s helpers, the senior demon Screwtape, who is corresponding with his nephew Wormword. Wormwood is just beginning his career as a tempter, and has been assigned to a young man in England, about the time that World War 2 is beginning. We never do learn who Wormwood is tempting; his is simply identified as “the Patient”. But we learn much about him, as early in the book he becomes an adult convert to Christianity (reported by Wormwood and commented on by Screwtape in Letter 2). Screwtape tells Wormwood, “There is no need to despair; hundreds of these adult converts have been reclaimed after a brief sojourn in the Enemy’s [meaning God] camp and are not with us.”

Throughout the rest of the book, Screwtape coaches Wormwood in the art of temptation, while Wormwood, in letters that we don’t see, reports to Screwtape about what he is doing to tempt the patient and what the result is. The result is a wonderful insight into human nature, our relationship with God, and what temptation and sin are all about. When the patient’s rocky relationship with his mother does not improve after his conversion, Screwtape tells Wormwood, “It is…impossible to prevent his praying for his mother, but we have means of rendering the prayers innocuous. Make sure that they are always “spiritual,” that he is always concerned with the state of her soul and never with her rheumatism.” When the patient acquires a new set of friends, Screwtape says they “are just the sort of people we want him to know–rich, smart, superficially intellectual, and brightly sceptical about everything in the world.” When the patient meets and falls in love with a Christian woman who would be a perfect helpmate to him, Screwtape says of her, “a two-faced little cheat…who looks as if she’d faint at the sight of blood, and then dies with a smile…filthy, insipid little prude…she makes me want to vomit!”

With many such statements, Lewis keeps us entertained, while at the same time helping us to understand ourselves. In Letter 25 he talked about similarity and change, and has Screwtape tell how the world below has caused human (“two-legged vermin”) to have a horror of “the same old thing”. Humans want change, and the tempters should give it to them. But Screwtape warns Wormwood how God provides for change in a positive way. “The horror of the Same Old Thing is one of the most valuable passions we have produced in the human heart–an endless source of heresies in religion, folly in counsel, infidelity in marriage, and inconsistency in friendship…The humans…need change, [so] the Enenmy…has made change pleasurable to them….He has balanced the love of change in them by a love of permanence. He has contrived to gratify both tastes together in the very world He has made, by that union of change and permanence which we call Rhythm.” Wonder, wonderful stuff.

The main theme which seemed to stand out to me, in a way it didn’t 33 years ago, was that Screwtape advised Wormwood to direct the man into a state of confusion. Confusion is what drives people to Satan. Unsaid was that order drives people to God: orderly habits, orderly thinking, orderly praying, etc.

If you haven’t read The Screwtape Letters, I urge you to do so. Don’t just read it: study it, meditate on it, reflection on Lewis’s genius, and grow because of it.