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

Re: [mythsoc] Re: McGrath bio of Lewis

Expand Messages
  • Mike Foster
    The recent collection of her letters reveal her as witty, spirited, and a lively companion for Jack Lewis. She did insult a few friends’ wives, however.
    Message 1 of 5 , Mar 17, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      The recent collection of her letters reveal her as witty, spirited, and a lively companion for Jack Lewis.  She did insult a few friends’ wives, however.
       
      Mike Foster
       
      Sent: Sunday, March 17, 2013 2:56 PM
      Subject: Re: [mythsoc] Re: McGrath bio of Lewis
       
       

      I agree with you, Margaret about Joy.  What is the problem with Lewis' literary scholarship?

       
      Linda C. DeMars
       


      On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 3:07 PM, Margaret L. Carter <mlcvamp@...> wrote:
       

      "C.S. Lewis was a giant of science fiction and Christian apology. But what
      of his literary scholarship, or his marriage to an American gold digger?"

      "Gold digger"? Good grief. It's reasonable to point out that his relationship with Joy Davidman was more complex than the "sentimentalized" popularly known version, but I have never read any indication that Joy was THAT.

      Margaret Carter

       
    • John Rateliff
      ... This no doubt refers to a line in Dirda s review: That it scants Lewis the literary scholar is nearly my only complaint about Alister McGrath’s [book]
      Message 2 of 5 , Mar 17, 2013
      • 0 Attachment


        On Mar 17, 2013, at 12:56 PM, Linda DeMars wrote:
        . . .   What is the problem with Lewis' literary scholarship?

           This no doubt refers to a line in Dirda's review: 

        "That it scants Lewis the literary scholar is nearly my only complaint about Alister McGrath’s [book]"

        --JDR


      • wendell_wagner
        Note that the line That it scants Lewis the literary scholar is nearly my only complaint about Alister McGrath’s [book] is the summary of the review that
        Message 3 of 5 , Mar 17, 2013
        • 0 Attachment
          Note that the line "That it scants Lewis the literary scholar is nearly my only complaint about Alister McGrath’s [book]" is the summary of the review that Arts and Letters Daily gives, not a line in Dirda's review itself.
           
          I can say something more about this review.  First, Mike Dirda is a friend of mine.  Heck, he came over to my apartment to look through my collection of Sherlock Holmes pastiches a few months ago.  He's written a great book on Arthur Conan Doyle and the Sherlock Holmes stories (On Conan Doyle).  He's a brilliant reviewer who won a Pulitzer Prize for the body of his reviews and he's enormously well read.  The problem is that he's such a good reviewer that he's expected to review everything, including areas where he's not quite as well read as he should be.
           
          Although Mike's read a lot of Lewis, he's no expert on him.  Not surprisingly, when he reviews a biography of Lewis, the first thing he wonders about is whether the biography covers the Lewis's literary scholarship well, since Mike knows literary scholarship very well.  He can see that McGrath's book is not very good on that subject.  To be fair, Lewis was such a wide-ranging person that it would take a truly brilliant person to write a great biography of him, and it would take a truly brilliant person to review that book.  McGrath and Dirda aren't quite those people.
           
          Wendell Wagner
           
          In a message dated 3/17/2013 5:18:55 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, sacnoth@... writes:
           



          On Mar 17, 2013, at 12:56 PM, Linda DeMars wrote:
          . . .   What is the problem with Lewis' literary scholarship?

             This no doubt refers to a line in Dirda's review: 

          "That it scants Lewis the literary scholar is nearly my only complaint about Alister McGrath’s [book]"

          --JDR


        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.