Re: Re: [mythsoc] Pullman about Lewis
- I know that Philip thought quite a lot of Peter Goldthwaite's book, The
Natural History of Make-Believe, which is actually written by a man with a
Christian point of view, but which is rather scathing about both Tolkien and
Lewis(but complimentary say about Greene or Collodi). I've bought the book
and read it; it's interesting and wellwritten though I'm not convinced by
Goldthwaite's arguments. Basically he doesn't like the idea of sub-creation,
as Tolkien put it.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, 1 November 2000 10:47
Subject: Re: Re: [mythsoc] Pullman about Lewis
> In a message dated 10/31/0 9:25:34 PM, Christine wrote:
> <<I did find the first book quite interesting, the second book left rather
> bitter taste. It was not altogether suprising that he is anti-religious
> (rather than un-religious, if you will).>>
> I don't think he's anti-religious (at least, I don't think he'd describe
> himself that way) so much as anti-Christian or anti-theist. What bothered
> most about it is that his views don't seem to be thought through very
> they're full of inconsistencies that become more and more jarring as the
> progresses. Ursula Le Guin's world-view is probably non-Christian to the
> degree (and essentially non-theistic), yet it's never bothered me because
> it's both consistent and very rich, and it has a balance to it that sees
> need to attack what it's not. Pullman annoys me in the same way that
> fundamentalist-Christian fantasies a la Frank Peretti irritate me, except
> that luckily he writes a thousand times better, and *does* have much more
> << I really doubt that I will pick up
> the third volume.>>
> You should: it has some really wonderful things in it, although, as I
> found the conclusion disappointing.
> The Mythopoeic Society website http://www.mythsoc.org
- On Wed, 1 Nov 2000, Sophie Masson wrote:
> I know that Philip thought quite a lot of Peter Goldthwaite's book, TheJohn Goldthwaite. It's a stunning book - stunningly bad, in my opinion.
> Natural History of Make-Believe, which is actually written by a man with a
> Christian point of view, but which is rather scathing about both Tolkien and
> Lewis(but complimentary say about Greene or Collodi). I've bought the book
> and read it; it's interesting and wellwritten though I'm not convinced by
> Goldthwaite's arguments. Basically he doesn't like the idea of sub-creation,
> as Tolkien put it.
His denunciation of Narnia outdoes anything I've seen elsewhere from even
the most fanatical anti-Narnian, including Pullman. His argument against
Tolkien's theory of sub-creation is to charge that Tolkien was a bad
Christian by advancing it, since to subcreate is (Goldthwaite says) to
imply that there is something insufficient about God's primary creation,
and thereby to insult God and accuse Him of imperfection.
Goldthwaite also spends pages upon pages on a bizarre theory of Lewis
Carroll's writerly motivations that I can't even try to summarize.