Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

17917Re: [mythsoc] Re: which biography?

Expand Messages
  • David Bratman
    Apr 3, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      At 11:50 AM 3/31/2007 -0500, Joe R. Christopher wrote:

      >David's praise of _The Narnian_ as the best of the biographies is
      >understandable, but it's an interpretative biography almost entirely
      >(except, I think, for a few unpublished letters), not one with new

      To be specific, I praised it as the best biography to read for a person who
      just wants to read a biography of Lewis. Researchers should go first to
      Green and Hooper's _C.S. Lewis: A Biography_ and Hooper's _C.S. Lewis
      Companion & Guide_. Both are fine research tools. But I wouldn't
      recommend either for the casual reader.

      At 09:44 PM 3/31/2007 -0400, WendellWag@... wrote:

      >The point of showing how many little factual errors Wilson made is to show
      >just how fast he was working.

      That doesn't prove anything. Factual sloppiness is not limited to fast
      workers. And whether Wilson worked quickly or slowly, it doesn't prove
      that he was wrong on the bigger points. In fact, given what you say:

      >In fact, it's clear that Wilson was working very fast when he researched and
      >wrote the book. Wilson is what's sometimes called a "quick study" (i.e.,
      >someone who can research a large subject and summarize it very quickly). I
      >think this is partly because he comes out of a British academic tradition in
      >which this ability is highly valued. When you spend your undergraduate career
      >writing an essay every week for your tutor which is supposed to be both
      >well-written and moderately insightful, you learn to be able to do this sort
      >of quick research and writing.

      the more quickly Wilson worked, the more I am impressed by how much of a
      good job he _did_ do.

      >one should hesitate about
      >accepting the larger conclusions that Wilson makes about Lewis. Some of
      >those conclusions are reasonable and a fairly good analysis of Lewis,
      >considering how little time Wilson spent on the book. Some of them
      >are just way off though, in my opinion.

      I agree, but I have similar mixed feelings about the conclusions of Hooper
      and Lindskoog, who each spent most of a lifetime studying Lewis. And I
      judge their broad conclusions by their broad conclusions, not by whether
      they mis-spell names or forgot which room Wheaton College keeps Malcolm
      Muggeridge's typewriter in.

      David Bratman
    • Show all 6 messages in this topic