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

Re: [mythsoc] a Lewis question

Expand Messages
  • David Bratman
    It s to Cecil and Daphne Harwood, Sep. 11, 1945 (v. 2, p. 669-70). Re Jane, she wasn t meant to illustrate the problem of the married woman and her own career
    Message 1 of 4 , May 24, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      It's to Cecil and Daphne Harwood, Sep. 11, 1945 (v. 2, p. 669-70).

      "Re Jane, she wasn't meant to illustrate the problem of the married woman and her own career in general: rather the problem of everyone who follows an imagined vocation at the expense of a real one. Perhaps I shd have emphasised more the fact that her thesis on Donne was all derivative bilge."


      -----Original Message-----
      >From: John Rateliff <sacnoth@...>
      >Sent: May 24, 2013 2:17 PM
      >To: "Mythsoc (mythsoc@yahoogroups.com)" <mythsoc@yahoogroups.com>
      >Subject: [mythsoc] a Lewis question
      >
      >Okay, I admit defeat. A few weeks ago I came across a passage in one of Lewis's letters in which he remarked that Jane Studdock from THAT HIDEOUS STRENGTH was a poor scholar who would have produced mediocre work had she ever completed her thesis; that her true vocation was to be a housewife. I've just been going through all the references to THS in the index of Vols II and III but not found the relevant passage. Is there any Lewisians (Ludovicians?) on this list more familiar with the 3900 pages of CSL's COLLECTED LETTERS who might be able to point me to the letter in question? For what it's worth, I had been looking up things in the 1942 and 1954 sections, though I did skim some in other sections so it might be pretty much anywhere.
      >Any help much appreciated.
      >--John R.
      >
      >------------------------------------
      >
      >The Mythopoeic Society website http://www.mythsoc.orgYahoo! Groups Links
      >
      >
      >
    • Croft, Janet B.
      One of the nice things about the _Letters_ is that you can do search-inside-the-book on Amazon with them - and practically all of Lewis s works. Try v.2, p
      Message 2 of 4 , May 24, 2013
      • 0 Attachment

        One of the nice things about the _Letters_ is that you can do search-inside-the-book on Amazon with them – and practically all of Lewis’s works. Try v.2, p 670, 11 Sept 1945, about an imagined vocation versus a real one. (An interesting point – I used the word “thesis” to search and it brought up an earlier letter concerning Damaris in _The Place of the Lion_ and her thesis – possibly a useful parallel to pursue?)

         

        Janet Brennan Croft

        Editor of Mythlore http://www.mythsoc.org/mythlore.html

         

        From: mythsoc@yahoogroups.com [mailto:mythsoc@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of John Rateliff
        Sent: Friday, May 24, 2013 4:17 PM
        To: Mythsoc (mythsoc@yahoogroups.com)
        Subject: [mythsoc] a Lewis question

         

         

        Okay, I admit defeat. A few weeks ago I came across a passage in one of Lewis's letters in which he remarked that Jane Studdock from THAT HIDEOUS STRENGTH was a poor scholar who would have produced mediocre work had she ever completed her thesis; that her true vocation was to be a housewife. I've just been going through all the references to THS in the index of Vols II and III but not found the relevant passage. Is there any Lewisians (Ludovicians?) on this list more familiar with the 3900 pages of CSL's COLLECTED LETTERS who might be able to point me to the letter in question? For what it's worth, I had been looking up things in the 1942 and 1954 sections, though I did skim some in other sections so it might be pretty much anywhere.
        Any help much appreciated.
        --John R.

      • John Rateliff
        ... Duly noted; I ll try that next time. Re. the Damaris comment, I d actually been looking this one up (successfully) to juxtapose with CSL s first letter to
        Message 3 of 4 , May 24, 2013
        • 0 Attachment

          On May 24, 2013, at 3:00 PM, Croft, Janet B. wrote:


          Duly noted; I'll try that next time.

          Re. the Damaris comment, I'd actually been looking this one up (successfully) to juxtapose with CSL's first letter to Eddison when I'd fortuitously come across the Jane S. piece and thought it also relevant to the point. I've been successful in finding the Damaris quote again but the Jane reference eluded my follow-up search; hence my earlier post. So now I have all three pieces of the puzzle; many thanks.

          One more Lewis question for the group: CSL uses the phrase "house woman" in his second letter to Eddison -- is that a term anyone here's familiar with? I haven't been able to trace it, so I don't know what its connotation might be or what he's implying by the term. As always any help much appreciated.

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