C.S. Lewis, Till We Have Faces, part 1
Vložit
- čas přidán 5. 09. 2024
- C.S. Lewis's greatest novel is based on a variation of a myth told in Ovid and Apuleius, the love of the god of love (Cupid) for the soul (Psyche). The divinization of erotic love was present in the ancient world, but it was only one heresy among many. C.S. Lewis observed in his work The Allegory of Love that it becomes the singular feature of the medieval courtly love tradition, whose conventions remain with us to this day.
Lewis is at pains to demonstrate how erotic love is related to divine Love in this myth directed at his contemporary (largely agnostic) audience. For Lewis, the real God of Love is Jesus, the lamb who was slain who takes away the sins of the world.
Lewis writes from the perspective of an agnostic old Queen, Orual, writing from within her pagan context. Orual writes bitterly against the gods of her culture, whom she blames for her greatest losses.
All the same, her retrospective portrait of the religion of her culture and its contrast with the wisdom of her beloved Greek teacher, a man nicknamed the Fox, exposes many contradictions in her narrative.
Lewis uses the myth of Cupid and Psyche to illustrate the theme of love in relation to two primary motifs, the blood sacrifice central to the life and prosperity of her kingdom of Glome and the light of reason.
It is a connection his narrator cannot see however plain it is to the reader.
❤️ If you find my channel helpful, become a channel member: / drscottmasson
5:30 This is old joke about Cupid, from time before 1991.
- What is country of origin of Cupid?
- Soviet Union. He fly naked, armed to the teeth, he shoot to people and call it love.
I really enjoyed this book, a beautiful piece of literature and so dramatic and captivating! I’ve always enjoyed mythology and this take, one of hatred towards the gods, is so different from many written pieces on mythology and so interesting. I was wondering, as a scholar, what are some of your favorite books that you think everyone should read?
I recommend that you follow Paideia Today. There are many books that we don't cover that I recommend, but what we DO cover is certainly worthy of your attention.
1:55 In my edition in first chapter Fox says that Ungit is Aphrodite, but more Babylonian's Aphrodite than Greek's one. After that he told Oural story about Aphrodite, from which she conclude, that in Greece she is more beautiful than in Glome, in both places she raise equal fear.
That is what Fox understands. Is his understanding correct?
Thank you for the recommendation of "Till We Have Faces" dr Masson, today I ended reading it. "Till We Have Faces" is very good, maybe even great book, I can't decide at this moment. Quite surprisingly to me, it is not very long and also seems to be quit easy to understand, but simplicity can be misleading. I will think about it in the future for sure.
The black stone sounds a little like the Islamic black stone that the Muslims kiss, and possibly worship, but they don’t officially say that. Now I haven’t read the book yet. Need some grounding before I started that, so I don’t give up too soon. That’s where ur presentation has been useful. Thanksp
My immediate thought exactly. C. S. Lewis was lucky, nowadays they would be after him like after Salman Rushdie on account of "the satanic verses" .
thank you, mister
14:15 If I can, I disagree. Oural was agnostic until she saw Shadow Beast in chapter XV, after which in my edition he says in her mind "I have proof that gods exists and they hate me.".
When reading these characters, you mustn’t think that it is Lewis speaking. It is the characters who are speaking from the limitations of their perspective. The main character transforms as the novel progresses. In that sense it is a Bildungsroman.
@@LitProf I think I follow text closely enough to not put Lewis into characters. My editions have some errors since it is translation from English, but I don't have access to any other in real book form. In it in chapter XV, after Psyche light the lamp Orual see a Shadow Beast who speaks to her and exile Psyche. After that in the same chapter she says that she sees reality in new light, since now he know gods exists and hate her. When in previous parts, for example when for brief moment she see wonderful palace, she have doubt "Is this reality of just mind is tricking me?", from this moment I found now doubts about gods existence in her words.
Maybe my edition was truly mess up in translation, but if so problem true problem is with translation. I know that some errors are in it, since I can catch them in your readings in this lectures. Also few times sentences broke rules of my native tongue, but this is just fault of the editors.
@@LitProf "In that sense it is a Bildungsroman." I would rather call it conversion story. Bildungsroman is probably inspired by genera of conversions stories, but from what I know it is secular in character. "Till We Have Faces" is not secular in my reading and have for me clearly christian underpinnings. But, this is topic for another discussion.
You mentioned her conversion as when she became queen and not during book two? You also seemed to say you don’t believe she converted? To me her true transformation and conversion happens at the end of her life (beginning of book two) and her becoming queen was merely her adding other face and hiding from her past/splitting her identity and killing the old her. Maybe you speak on this on your other lectures. Because it seems to be she is a believer and has had a full “conversation/transformation” by the end, you mentioned there is “a hint” of not being a grumbler. I think it’s pretty overt
7:05 Is Fox agnostic? In the novel he often speaks about stoics conception of god, also about nature, "inside you", so I probably not call he in such way. But maybe I just didn't understand him.
He is an agnostic.
I would call him a humanist.
41:15 In this moment we arrive at one of the big divide among Christians. There are one that believe that we need to literally eat Christ body and drink his blood and second that it is some form of symbolism. Gospel of John speaks about this loudly. If we choose first option, Christianity is extremely blood religion, in my opinion, far more bloody that in Old Testament.
No one thinks it is entirely literal.
@@LitProf Catholics and Orthodox of old fashion (not modern kind of Catholics and Orthodox), says that it is "body and blood, soul and divinity" of Jesus Christ, so my answer depend on what we mean by "entirely literal". If by this there are no one that thinks that it is true body and blood of Christ, as true as when He walks on earth, this statement is false. If we should understand by that, that everyone believe that this mean even more that it is true body and blood of Christ, this may be true.
We know what Gospel of John tells about it. „Then the Jews began to argue with one another, saying, “How can this man give us His flesh to eat?” 53 So Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in yourselves. [...] So then many of His disciples, when they heard this, said, “This statement is very unpleasant; who can listen to it?” 61 But Jesus, aware that His disciples were complaining about this, said to them, “Is this offensive to you? 62 What then if you see the Son of Man ascending to where He was before?”.
I can't decided, should I read "Till We Have Faces" or not? Is very good literature from what I hear at the beginning, maybe even great, but I'm still not convinced.
It is Lewis's best book by far.
@@LitProf I believe that it is true, but what important things we can learn from it? And can it gives us aesthetic pleasure of reading? Since it is mostly forgotten, I have some doubts about it.
In my current mood, knowing that something is best Lewis' work is just not enough for me.
@@LitProf Thank you for encouragement. Today I got the book and I start reading it. It looks much shorter than I anticipated.
It was required reading for me in a college class 20+ years ago and it remains my FAVORITE piece of fiction.