"...Jack found the majority of conventional science-fiction stories not at all to his taste and preferred the romantic fantasy writers - such as David Lindsay, Ray Bradbury, ER Eddison, Mervyn Peake and Tolkien - to the work of social prophets like Huxley and Orwell or scientific visionaries like Arthur C Clarke." (p. 55)
My comments:
"Jack," of course, is Lewis;
I do not think that I have read this particular Lewis biography before but, in any case, it is worthwhile to either read or reread it;
for previous blog references to Lewis, see here;
I could not get into either David Lindsay's Voyage To Arcturus or George MacDonald's Phantastes, both recommended by Lewis;
I do not share either Sibley's admiration for Lewis' philosophical reasoning or his acceptance of the believability of the settings of Lewis' interplanetary novels;
I accept that the gods (if not God!) think that I should read this book right now;
however, because I also want to continue blogging, I pose the question that is the title of this post.
9 comments:
Hi, Paul!
Interesting question, which of the works of Poul Anderson might C.S. Lewis have read and enjoyed? Since Lewis died in 1963 I'll restrict my suggestions only to what Anderson wrote up till then.
From what Brian Sibley said, Lewis might not have cared much for the "harder" SF Anderson wrote. Works like TWILIGHT WORLD, THE ENEMY STARS, or BRAIN WAVE. Altho I hope Lewis did these books if he read any of them.
I think, tho, Lewis would have enjoyed THE BROKEN SWORD, THE HIGH CRUSADE, and THREE HEARTS AND THREE LIONS. These should fit in with his taste for "romantic fantasy."
Does Brian Sibley mention Lewis as having read any of the works of Poul Anderson?
I've tried to read Mervyn Peake's GORMENGHAST but gave up halfway thru the book. Bluntly, I thought it boring
Sean
Sean,
No, Sibley doesn't mention Anderson. Unfortunately, of course, Anderson's name was not as well known as those that are mentioned.
Paul.
Hi, Paul!
Darn and drat, that Anderson is not mentioned by Sibley! I can only hope hitherto unknown letters by Lewis are found in which he does comment on some of the works of Poul Anderson. And Lewis does discuss what might be called the theological aspects of SF in his essay "Religion and Rocketry."
This discussion reminded me how JRR Tolkien also liked science fiction. So I looked up what he said about in THE LETTERS OF JRR TOLKIEN and found some relevant comments on page 377, from a letter he wrote commenting on and correcting an interview he had given in 1967.
In response to a question about what he liked to read, Tolkien wrote: "For ' except ' read ' not even.' I read quite a lot--or more truly, try to read many books (notably so-called Science Fiction and Fantasy)." And in a footnote Tolkien added: "There are exceptions. I have read all that E.R. Eddison wrote, in spite of his peculiarly bad nomenclature and personal philosophy. I was greatly taken by the book that was (I believe) the runner up when THE L.R. was given the Fantasy Award: DEATH OF GRASS. I enjoy the SF of Isaac Asimov. Above these, I was recently deeply engaged in the books of Mary Renault: especially the two about Theseus, THE KING MUST DIE and THE BULL FROM THE SEA. A few days ago I actually received a card of appreciation from her, perhaps the piece of ' Fan-mail ' that gives me most pleasure."
I was a bit surprised by Tolkien's comment about Asimov. These two writers could hardly be more different from each other! I wonder what Tolkien thought of the original Foundation books?
And perhaps there are letters or notes by Tolkien in which he comments on some of Anderson's works?
Sean
Sean,
FOUNDATION and LOTR: both in 3 vols; each part of a longer history. Other than that, they have nothing in common.
Paul.
I seem to recall reading a transcript of a discussion involving C.S. Lewis and several other people, where Poul Anderson was mentioned. I'm not sure whether it was Lewis or someone else who mentioned Anderson.
Best Regards,
Nicholas D. Rosen
Hi, Paul!
Quite, about the only thing the Foundation books and THE LORD OF THE RINGS have in common is them being parts of a longer, much longer history.
Moreover, I still recall how disappointed I was by the original Foundation books when I reread them four or five years ago. Large parts of them were, frankly, boring. Tolkien, by contrast, continues to give me pleasure when I reread or browse thru his books.
Sean
Hi, Nicholas!
I've been wondering, what did you think of the discussions Paul and I had about S.M. Stirling's THE PESHAWAR LANCERS and the connections, allusions, analogies to be found with various of the works of Poul Anderson?
Regards! Sean
Nicholas,
It would be interesting if it were possible to track down that transcript. The only such discussion of which I know is the one already mentioned: http://poulandersonappreciation.blogspot.co.uk/search?q=Aldiss,+Amis,+Anderson,+Asimov,+Lewis -
- which doesn't mention Anderson, I don't think.
Paul.
Hi, Paul!
And the only PUBLISHED discussions of the works of Poul Anderson I know of are, first the monograph and essays written by Sandra Miesel (e.g., her AGAINST TIME'S ARROW) and Jean-Daniel Breque's ORPHEE AUX ETOILE (alas, I don't know French!). And I actually have a copy of Breque's book, which he gave me to show thanks for the help I was able to give him.
Sean
Post a Comment