C. S. Lewis' Space Trilogy

Cafe Society
1

Anybody have any opinions on this? I read the first 2 awhile ago and I just finished That Hideous Strength a few days ago after trying 2 or 3 times to read it. It’s a good book but it gets very muddled and drags along at parts.

Lewis is a brave man for having done some of the bizarre stuff that he did-especially in that last one. If I read the last one for anything it would have been for the philosophy/theology aspect. Just the idea for Perelandra was awesome to me, though. I loved the tie-ins to Middle Earth (read the intro to That Hideous Strength).

2

This trilogy is one of my favorite works of sci-fi. Very moving stuff.

Out of the Silent Planet is a neat little pulp-style sci-fi story, with a slight Christian metaphysical angle, and a somewhat simplistic alien culture (i.e., the nature-connected hross, the coldly scientific sorns, and the industrious, artsy ummm… other creatures. Pfifltriggi? Can’t recall.

Then comes Perelandra, which, IMO, is an absolute powerhouse. Lewis’ ruminations on the nature of evil, the very good reasons why human beings have emotions like hate (to fight evil, with our fists as well as our hearts and minds), the terrible sacrifice of Christ, the divinity that an unfallen Adam and Eve must have possessed, and his brilliant apologia for the nagging unfairness of the biblical Eden story (that God was going to give Adam and Eve all of the knowledge that the trees’ fruit possessed, if only they would show that they could follow his instructions for a little while).

And this praise from an atheist, mind you. :slight_smile:

That Hideous Strength was a bit more tedious, in my mind, but not wholly unsatisfying. It was interesting to see him integrate Merlin into the Christian worldview (namely, by showing that he doesn’t quite fit, and that he bends the rules rather more than the powers of good might hope), and to show the banal, vacuous side of evil (in a university, naturally).

An interesting point he brings up throughout (which his compatriot Tolkien touched on in the Silmarillion) is that misdeeds have consequences, and though God can ultimately surmount any obstacles humans may lay in the way, it’s not without a price–often terrible–and the original state cannot be restored. Thus, the protagonists of THS were to have borne a child that would help save the world, etc., but they refused to heed such designs (pursuing “modern” notions of equality between the sexes, etc.), missing their chance, and leading to much trouble.

3

A great series. THS isn’t so connected to the first two plot-wise, but a good book. I’d back up the idea that Perelandra is the heavy hitter of the three.

Toadspittle, that’s a pretty good summary/review of the books. Thanks for that, especially seeing as how I guess you’re not not predisposed to agree with CSL’s worldview. My problem with the book is that I don’t necessarily view the Adam/Eve story as strict history, and I’m one of the most churchified people on this board. I don’t know how to deal with the idea treating that as the basis for theological points.

4

I loved Out of the Silent Planet, but Perelandra was an interesting setting and a pretty trite and obvious story (Lewis has said he liked the setting, but had no idea what to write about it, and it shows). I didn’t find the philosophy all that impressive, either.

That Hideous Strength I found unreadable.

5

Go figure: That Hideous Strength was my favorite of the three, Perelandra my least favorite. I guess I wasn’t much into Lewis’s version of scifi (a space coffin?), but the last of the three books had more of a fantasy aspect, which I enjoyed much as I enjoyed The Chronicles of Narnia.

6

I thought Perelandra was the best of the three, and agree with the consensus that That Hideous Strength was pretty weak.

I got the feeling that Perelandra was the book where Lewis could take the background for granted, and reenact the story of Adam and Eve as a new myth. Out of the Silent Planet was exactly what he said it was, an attempt to introduce the reader to Christian themes as part of popular literature. The scene with Ransom interpreting the speech from Weston to the eldil was a trifle heavy-handed, but funny, and Perelandra worked for me because it was less heavy-handed. As Ransom experiences the myth of the Garden on Venus, the reader experiences it as well.

The only thing Lewis ever wrote that I flat out didn’t care for was Until We Have Faces, which I toiled thru once but could never bring myself to reread. Lewis said it was his favorite of all his fiction - go figure.

Regards,
Shodan

7

I took a class in CS Lewis’s fiction in college. We took to referring to the third volume as “That Hideous Length.” They’re not bad, though I wouldn’t call them anywhere near as good at what they do as the Chronicles of Narnia are.

I liked ‘Till We Have Faces,’ though it was pretty strange and I had to read it a couple of times.

8

I read the series years ago, and hated it. I’m not sure why…

9

Yeah, it’s not a timeless classic like the Narnia series.

10

I’ll join in the chorus of those who liked Perelandra best. That Hideous Strength was kinda horrifying to me – I mean “The Head” – literally??? ewwwww…

I like the way Lewis thought about angels, as REALLY non-corporeal entities. I don’t think angels would be quite as cuddly and comforting as people seem to think they would be.

Compare the short story Hell is the Absence of God by Ted Chiang. Wow.

11

I’ve never been able to get through OUT OF, I enjoyed PERELANDRA as a rousing C’tian adventure story & probably the one that could be most successfully filmed, but THAT HIDEOUS STRENGTH is the one I keep rereading. “The Head” is supposed to be horrifying- CSL would be proud of Archergal’s response S

I’ll have to look up the Chiang story.

Oh- and I thought TILL WE HAVE FACES utterly rocked!

12

I liked That Hideous Strength the best, too. The disturbing parts were quite effectively disturbing.