The servant gave me my coat and hat, and in a glow of self-satisfaction I walked out into the night. "A delightful evening," I reflected, "the nicest kind of people. What I said about finance and philosophy impressed them; and how they laughed when I imitated a pig squealing.
But soon after, "God, it's awful", I muttered, "I wish I was dead".
LOGAN PEARSALL SMITH, Trivia, 1918
And just because I like it, a bit from C.S. Lewis's The Voyage of the Dawn Treader, as the ship's company is deciding not to sail on into a mysterious darkness ahead of them. One member of the party - the immortal mouse Reepicheep - objects:
"If I were addressing peasants or slaves," [Reepicheep] said, "I might assume that this suggestion proceeded from cowardice. But I hope it will never be told in Narnia that a company of noble and royal persons in the flower of their age turned tail because they were afraid of the dark."
"But what manner of use would it be plowing through that blackness?" asked Drinian.
"Use?" replied Reepicheep. "Use, Captain? If by use you mean filling our bellies or our purses, I confess it will be of no use at all. So far as I know we did not set sail to look for things useful but to seek honour and adventure. And here is as great an adventure as ever I heard of, and here, if we turn back, no little impeachment of all our honours."
I don't think Lewis's great gift for pastiche was ever on better display than in certain passages of his Narnia series. This particular excerpt is also a good summary of the way that aristocrats once perceived themselves in relation to their social inferiors. Whether it was ever accurate is another matter. I thought of quoting it to my students in order to explain the distinction between "aristocratic" and "bourgeois", because they had some difficulty grasping the idea, beyond the matter of titles, but feared I might get a reputation for frivolity.
Lewis has sometimes been described as a "coarse" writer, partly because of his tendency to use his fiction for didactic purposes, and partly because of his occasional lapses into a kind of bullying tone in his non-fictional works. One of the reasons A.N. Wilson preferred his scholarly commentaries on English literature is that it was the one area of Lewis's work, he believed, in which Lewis's tendency to fight like a "police-court solicitor" was held in check. I understand what these critics mean; I can think of many examples in Lewis's work to support these views; and yet, and yet - I don't agree with them. In all his work, Lewis could move from coarseness and bullying to a hyper-sensitive, poetic awareness of the texture of the human experience of the senses, of life in the body. Smells, sounds, the weather, the look of firelight or sunlight in the interior of a house, their effect upon our moods - all these he conveys with a fidelity and vigour that few writers have equalled. In re-reading the Narnia series, in particular, I've found that they awaken not merely the memory of previous readings, but a curious sense that I am reading and remembering an account of my own experience, so intensely did I respond to Lewis's word-pictures and sensations. It may not be coincidental that Lewis was especially good at conveying the feelings and characteristics of animals.
A few favourites follow:
Mr. Bultitude's mind was as furry and unhuman in shape as his body. He did not remember, as a man in his situation would have remembered, the provincial zoo from which he had escaped during a fire, nor his first snarling and terrified arrival at the Manor, nor the slow stages whereby he had learned to love and trust its inhabitants. He did not know that he loved and trusted them now. He did not know that they were people, nor that he was a bear. Indeed, he did not know that he existed at all: everything that is represented by the words I and Me and Thou was absent from his mind. When Mrs. Maggs gave him a tin of golden syrup, as she did every Sunday morning, he did not recognize either a giver or a recipient. Goodness occurred and he tasted it. And that was all. Hence his loves might, if you wished, all be described as cupboard loves: food and warmth, hands that caressed, voices that reassured, were their objects. But if by a cupboard love you meant something cold or calculating you would be quite misunderstanding the real quality of the beast's sensations. He was no more like a human egoist than he was like a human altruist. There was no prose in his life. The appetencies which a human mind might disdain as cupboard loves were for him quivering and ecstatic aspirations which absorbed his whole being, infinite yearnings, stabbed with the threat of tragedy and shot through with the colours of Paradise. One of our race, if plunged back for a moment in the warm, trembling, iridescent pool of that pre-Adamite consciousness, would have emerged believing that he had grasped the absolute: for the states below reason and the states above it have, by their common contrast to the life we know, a certain superficial resemblance. Sometimes there returns to us from infancy the memory of a nameless delight or terror, attached to any delightful or dreadful thing, a potent adjective floating in a nounless void, a pure quality. At such moments we have experience of the shallows of that pool. But fathoms deeper than any memory can take us, right down in the central warmth and dimness, the bear lived all its life. --THAT HIDEOUS STRENGTH
Though Tashbaan looked very far away when they first saw it, it refused to look any further away as they went on. Shasta gave up looking back at it, for it only gave him the feeling that they were not moving at all. Then the light became a nuisance. The glare of the sand made his eyes ache: but he knew he mustn't shut them. He must screw them up and keep looking on ahead at Mount Pire and shouting out directions. Then came the heat. He noticed it for the first time when he had to dismount and walk: as he slipped down to the sand the heat from it struck up into his face as if from the opening of an oven door. Next time it was worse. But the third time, as his bare feet touched the sand he screamed with pain and got one foot back in the strirrup and the other half over Bree's back before you could have said knife.
[...]
On again, trot and walk and trot, jingle-jingle-jingle, squeak-squeak-squeak, smell of hot horse, smell of hot self, blinding glare, headache. And nothing at all different for mile after mile. Tashbaan would never look any further away. The mountains would never look any nearer. You felt this had been going on for always--jingle-jingle-jingle, squeak-squeak-squeak, smell of hot horse, smell of hot self. --THE HORSE AND HIS BOY
It wasn't nearly such a nice cave as Mr Tumnus's, Lucy thought--just a hole in the ground but dry and earthy. It was very small so that when they all lay down they were all a bundle of clothes together, and what with that and being warmed up by their long walk they were really rather snug. If only the floor of the cave had been a little smoother! Then Mrs. Beaver handed round in the dark a little flask out of which everyone drank something--it made one cough and splutter a little and stung the throat, but it also made you feel deliciously warm after you'd swallowed it--and everyone went to sleep. --THE LION, THE WITCH AND THE WARDROBE
The voice...seemed to be sunlight and gold. Like gold not only as gold beautiful but as it is heavy: like sunlight not only as it falls gently on English walls in autumn but as it beats down on the jungle or the desert to engender life or destroy it. --THAT HIDEOUS STRENGTH (again)
16 comments:
Please do quote from Lewis to your students. We love to play, and we love familiar literature used to illustrate a point. If the teacher is having fun, then the students will too.
It's funny that you have Lewis on the mind. I have been thinking of him too, but in a negative way. The religious-minded students (where I live) rely too heavily on Lewis as a reason to argue points with liberal professors, which is futile, and tiring.
But if it is the instructor using Lewis, and in a loving and illustrative manner, not as a crutch for a religious argument, then go for it. Lewis is brilliant and a pleasure. Thanks for the post, it did make a bright spot.
Well, Lewis is a better writer than that woman who does the Harry Potter stuff, I'll give you that. But I don't find his alternation between mawkish sentimentalism and heavy-handed didacticism particularly appealing. If I was going to be a sentimental religious Anglophile (none of which I am), I'd definitely take Chesterton.
I don't find Lewis mawkishly sentimental in the least. But there's no arguing taste. "Sentimentality" is one of those words (accusations) that tends to have a highly personal and idiosyncratic meaning to every one who uses it.
I once thought of writing an essay "In Defense of Sentimentality in Literature" but I lost interest and now it appears that someone has beaten me to it.
Clio
I love that one about the bear. I often think about the passage about the woman feeding him.
I love the one about the bear. "..quivering and ecstatic aspirations which absorbed his whole being, infinite yearnings, stabbed with the threat of tragedy and shot through with the colours of Paradise."
That describes my dog's view of squirrels perfectly.
Yes, that's why I like it so - it seems perfectly to capture, from a human perspective, what it is to be an animal.
"I once thought of writing an essay "In Defense of Sentimentality in Literature" but I lost interest and now it appears that someone has beaten me to it."
Well, there's always this, from Chesterton's "Heretics":
“...that miserable fear of being sentimental, which is the meanest of all the modern terrors--meaner even than the terror which produces hygiene. Everywhere the robust and uproarious humour has come from the men who were capable not merely of sentimentalism, but a very silly sentimentalism. There has been no humour so robust or uproarious as that of the sentimentalist Steele or the sentimentalist Sterne or the sentimentalist Dickens. These creatures who wept like women were the creatures who laughed like men.”
Not that I think this is the case with Lewis; he wasn't that sentimental.
And I don't know, but I would like if you one day were to write about the aristocratic virtues (and vices).
My older son ran across a children's book last week by one of his favorite authors. I asked my younger son if he wanted me to read it out loud to him. Sensibly, he replied, "No, we're already in the middle of three other books."
Monday, I asked him which of the three books he wanted me to read out loud.
"I want to start another one."
"But you just said the other night that you didn't want a new one?!"
"That one wasn't Narnia."
We're now well into The Silver Chair.
I know that there are all sorts of criticisms of C.S. Lewis, but I've loved his books since childhood, I've been inspired by his spiritual writings (regardless of style, etc.) as an adult, and my children have all adored Narnia.
There are so many books to read out loud to children that I never have time for all the ones we'd like. C.S. Lewis's books, and The Wind in the Willows, have been the only ones that I've reread to any of them.
But - but --- I'm shocked, shocked, I tell you - you don't include the Moomin books?
I think that Tove Jansson was Finland's Kenneth Graham, as seen through the eyes of Ingmar Bergman...
Clio
Since I first encountered it I've thought the Mr. Bultitude passage must be about as close as we can get to imagining the consciousness of animals. I think of it every time I see the perfectly pure, rapt, trembling attention my dogs give me when they think they're about to get some kind of treat.
You have a good point there! The Moomin books are some of my favorites, and I've read them to all three of my kids, but I've never reread any of them to any one child.
On the other hand, we quote them so much that they don't ever seem to go away.
The Mr Bultitude passage displays the quality I most love in Lewis: he was at all times purposeful. Nothing is just for show.
How many of his critics (not all) are professional Clever People, the Brittle Set!
Some nice quotes there, Clio.
Robert Townshend
Many apologies for the multiple typos in this post. I've since corrected them (Saturday Sep 20), and while it may not matter much to anyone, it makes me feel a good deal better. I'm at present using a friend's computer, so that corrections are easier to make.
Sigh. I wonder if I'll need to buy a new computer to be free of these problems?
Clio/Musette
Interesting (to me) to see you quote Logan Pearsall Smith. My local library has a very enjoyable book called THE BOOK OF DELIGHTS, edited by John Hadfield, which consists of art, poetry and snippets of literature that Mr. Hadfield found pleasurable and/or interesting. There are some excepts from Mr. Smith's (or is it "Mr. Pearsall Smith's) published work. I had never heard of him until perusing the Hadfield book, and while I wouldn't call any of the passages earth-shaking or breath-taking, they were interestign and enjoyable enough to make me want to look up some of his books. I gather he was someone well known at once time who is now pretty obscure now (although for all I know he is still fairly well known in the British Commonwealth). I'd be curious to know how you discovered him.
The way you did. I was given the Book of Delights for a Christmas present many years ago. After that, I learned more about Mr Pearsall Smith through reading about Bertrand Russell, who was married to his sister for a time. I like him because he's a witty and amusing society writer.
Clio
Wow, someone else who knows the Book of Delights! That's amazing! I thought it the most obscure book, a forgotten treasure! Glad to see someone else is familiar with it.
Post a Comment